Am 2013-10-31 22:36, schrieb Geoff Huston:
On 31 Oct 2013, at 11:57 pm, Dino Farinacci <[email protected]>
wrote:
Geoff, LISP can route the entire allocated address space (but just not
requires it to be everywhere). So arguably, LISP can do this at much
cheaper cost and complexity.
The reason for a dedicated block is similar to why we have an address
block for IPv4 and IPv6 multicast. To experiment to see if a
hard-coded block can provide any interesting ideas.
On the LISP page I already see LISP using IPv4 and IPv6 blocks for
this experiment. So what have you found out already in terms of
"interesting ideas"? What do you think that a larger block would
inform you that is not possible with the existing block?
(using /56 end site prefixes a /32 can accommodate 16,777,216 end
sites of course, and even at a 10% utilisation level thats 1.7 million
end sites. So I;'m kinds mystified why a .32 can't tell you about
scaling given that we are talking of the order of 10**6 end sites
within such a block.)
The success of the internet is based on experiments which directly
scaled into production (like the IP protocol by Cerf and Kahn). Remind
the pain we have with the IPv4->IPv6-transition because there are not
enough IPv4-addresses for the whole internet-community. If you just go
for tiny experiments - like the last 6 years - LISP will never go on air
for the internet-community. Currently AVM provides a great chance to go
an air by integrating LISP into millions of consumer-routers 'til end of
the year and we shouldn't scare them away by a never-ending experiment.
If consumers adopt LISP, we'll need 10,000,000,000 prefixes within the
next ten years. That means each public PITR will have to announce
10,000,000,000 BGP-routes to itself if consumers use random PI-prefixes
from the global unicast space. Multiply the number of public PITRs
necessary for such a deployment with 10,000,000,000 BGP-routes each and
you'll realize LISP will either break the internet and go into decline
or just be a limited luxury for big companies. Using a dedicated
PI-prefix which can handle 10,000,000,000 subnets will reduce the
BGP-routes a public PITR has to announce to ONE. So using 24 or 32 bits
is way to less for the expected growth.
I want to ask everyone on the list: Which facts prevent a scaling
experiment with the aim of global production state? In my opinion a
/16-EID-prefix is perfect for that goal.
Best regards,
Renne
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
