On 25 nov 2008, at 5:04, Robin Whittle wrote:
I don't understand this clearly. IPv4 isn't "legacy" and won't be
until
Semantics. IPv4 is nearly 30 years old and severely behind the times.
Even its replacement, IPv6, isn't very new. The fact that many people
are running IPv4 doesn't change this.
Even if IPv4 applications are in the minority, and
still need to run, I don't understand your reference to 14 million
/24 prefixes.
Current practice is that you need a /24 to gain entry into the world
wide routing system. We have 221 usable /8s * 65536 = a maximum IPv4
routing table of 14483456 entries. That is of course 50 times as big
as what we have today, but at least there is some kind of reasonable
limitation here.
Hm, I'd rather redownload 5 out of 10 files when my ISP craps out
than
10 out of 10. Partial deployment for multihoming is still useful.
Yes, but I would say that for any substantial organisation, running
servers or having a bunch of desktop users or both, that they are not
going to invest in some new technology, more complexity, new
addressing arrangements perhaps and a second ISP if the new
multihoming scheme is only going to work for half their traffic.
We have less than 25000 multihomers world wide today, so apparently
most people are happy with even a single ISP, and would presumably be
even happier with some form of multihoming even if it doesn't provide
the full benefits of the "real" thing with PI addresing, especially if
there are no additional costs beyond a second connection.
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
