/127 between routers?

[George Bonser]

> > History has shown that creating hard boundaries between the network
> and
> > node portion (i.e. Classful addressing) may reduce forwarding
> > system flexibility and require mass software/hardware upgrades.
> 
> You can't apply a lesson learned when addresses are scarce to a
> scenario
> where addresses are plentiful. I bet we would hear the exact same
> concerns if IPv6 addresses were 256-bit.
> 
> 
> /Benny

I can imagine all sorts of things happening after the widespread
deployment of v6.  For example, let's say you currently have some kind
of application that keeps session state on a server that is in a
cluster.  So when a request arrives, you use some sort of session ID to
locate the server with the state information.  But let's say with v6 you
now simply program an ip address that has the value of the session ID.
To find the server with the state, you simply connect to the IP address
represented by or that is derived as some function of the session ID.

We might see servers with thousands of IP addresses configured where
those IP addresses are basically session cookies.  This is going to put
some interesting pressure on kernel developers. So you have a subnet
where the addresses are basically nothing more than 64-bit GUIDs
representing client connections.  Want to find where the client state
is?  No problem, connect to the GUID as the IP address or redirect the
connection there.  No more cluster software needed.