On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 03:51:43PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > >Now, some may take that as a sign the IETF needs to figure out how > >to handle 10^6 BGP prefixes... I'm not sure we'll be there for a > >few years with IPv6, but sooner or later we will, and someone needs > >to figure out what the Internet is going to look like at that point. > > It won't look good. ISPs will have to buy much more expensive > routers. At some point, people will start to filter out routes that > they feel they can live without and universal reachability will be a > thing of the past.
But don't we filter out routes we feel we can live without *right now* without the world ending? I mean, who accepts prefixes longer than /24 these days anyway? We've all decided that we "can live without" any network smaller than 254 hosts and it hasn't made a lick of difference to universal reachability. What's to stop someone who wants to carry around less prefixes from saying, "Bugg'rit, I'm not going to accept anything smaller than a /18"? - mark -- Mark Newton Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W) Network Engineer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (H) Internode Systems Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82282999 "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223