My comment was regarding customers believing that they were going to,
by default, get a statically allocated range, whatever the length.
If most customers get dynamically assigned (via PD or other means)
then the issue is not a major one.
MMC
On 06/02/2009, at 8:56 PM, Paul Jakma wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
DHCP(v6). Setting the idea in people's heads that a /64 IS going
to be their own statically is insane and will blow out provider's
own routing tables more than is rational.
Routing table size will be a function of the number of customers -
*not* the prefix length assigned to them (for so long as address
space is sufficiently sparsely allocated that there's a 1:1 mapping
from customer to prefix - which should be "for a long time" with
IPv6).
So (within that longer term constraint) it doesn't matter if you're
allocating your customer a /48, /56 or /64.
Indeed, what you're suggesting - smaller-than-64 allocations -
*would* increase routing table sizes. With your proposal those
indexes would increase greatly in depth (and possibly other space
increases due to not being able to optimise for "hierarchical
routing of bits past 64 is highly rare").
Think of IPv6 as a 64bit network address + host address. At least
for now.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma p...@clubi.ie p...@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
If you don't have a nasty obituary you probably didn't matter.
-- Freeman Dyson
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
