(another from wrong userid) ----- Forwarded message from Scott Brim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 06:41:49 -0800 From: Scott Brim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [RRG] Thoughts on the RRG/Routing Space Problem To: Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Russ White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected] X-Mailer: VM 8.0.5-504 under Emacs 22.1.1 (i386-apple-darwin8.10.1) Excerpts from Brian E Carpenter at 15:03:37 +1300 on Mon 3 Dec 2007: > On 2007-12-02 02:24, Russ White wrote: > <snip> > > > 2. An exponentially growing table of short prefixes, facilitated by the > > huge IPv6 address space (as Tony has pointed out, routing /32's in IPv6 > > is the same thing as routing hosts in IPv4, so you've gained nothing in > > table size if you go in that direction). > > Er, yes, there's a reason that the IPv6 design assumes > provider-based aggregation of prefixes, and multiple prefixes if you > have multiple providers. The PI heresy is an import from IPv4 > thinking. But if that heresy sweeps the world, we're going to need > LISP style mapping to exorcise it from the core. I think that's how > we got here. So it's let's-have-fun-with-rhetoric day, eh? We got here because of the rate*state problems, of which PI allocations are a small part. Once we got here, we discovered that we potentially had the freedom to abandon the dogma that you are clinging to. (At this point I believe you're supposed to say "I find your lack of faith disturbing"). ----- End forwarded message ----- -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
