Thus spake "Fred Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The RIRs have been trying pretty hard to make IPv6 allocations be one
prefix per ISP, with truly large edge networks being treated as
functionally equivalent to an ISP (PI addressing without admitting it is
being done). Make the bald assertion that this is equal to one prefix per
AS (they're not the same statement at all, but the number of currently
assigned AS numbers exceeds the number of prefixes under discussion, so
in my mind it makes a reasonable thumb-in-the-wind- guesstimate), that is
a reduction of the routing table size by an order of magnitude.
If we are able to reduce the routing table size by an order of magnitude,
I don't see that we have a requirement to fundamentally change the
routing technology to support it. We may *want* to (and yes, I would like
to, for various reasons), but that is a different assertion.
If we reduce the average number of prefixes per AS by an order of magnitude,
IMHO the result will be that there will be an order of magnitude growth in
the number of ASes. We're just going to trade one problem for another.
What we need is an interdomain routing system that can either (a)
drastically reduce the incremental cost of additional prefixes in the DFZ,
or (b) move the exist cost out of the DFZ to the people who want to
multihome. Both probably mean ditching BGP4 and moving to some sort of
inter-AS MPLS scheme, but it will never see the light of day unless it
allows leaving hosts and intra-site routing intact (i.e. hop-by-hop routing
and a single prefix per site). This last is why shim6 is DOA.
S
Stephen Sprunk "Stupid people surround themselves with smart
CCIE #3723 people. Smart people surround themselves with
K5SSS smart people who disagree with them." --Aaron Sorkin