IPv6 PI allocation

[Colm MacCarthaigh]

On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 02:59:59PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> Routers are being scaled to handle IPv4 routing table explosion (especially
> internal prefixes in bigger networks), and as a side effect, they can grow 
> to more IPv6 prefixes as well.

Exactly, I actually think the best thing we could do to mitigate this
problem would be to mandate that the smallest network size MUST be /64,
that way routing vendors can concentrate on designing fibs that
hash-bucket at that boundary. 

Right now, the use of /127's and /126's for link address by some
networks are a bigger part of future problems than anything represented
by PI.

Ultimately there are no magic engineering limits that prevents anyone
from routing or switching billions of routes, it will ultimately cost 
us in terms of more sillicon and memory, but we only need to do a better
job than IPv4 managed, it's no big deal.

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp at stdlib.net