[135461] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue Jan 25 17:08:57 2011
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:17:59 EST."
<op.vpvur91htfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:07:16 -0500
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1295993236_4971P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:17:59 EST, Ricky Beam said:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:46:19 -0500, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> > Dude... In IPv6, there are 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 /64s.
>
> Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
>
> "Dude, there are 256 /8 in IPv4."
>
> "640k ought to be enough for anyone."
>
> People can mismange anything into oblivion. IPv6 will end up the same
> mess IPv4 has become. (granted, it should take more than 30 years this
> time.)
To burn through all the /48s in 100 years, we'll have to use them up
at the rate of 89,255 *per second*.
That implies either *really* good aggregation, or your routers having enough
CPU to handle the BGP churn caused by 90K new prefixes arriving on the Internet
per second. Oh, and hot-pluggable memory, you'll need another terabyte of RAM
every few hours. At that point, running out of prefixes is the *least* of your
worries.
--==_Exmh_1295993236_4971P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFNP0mUcC3lWbTT17ARAt/RAJ9XzKbaCYIe83n1Lacae1CdmkjEhQCaAmIE
Tnm3k/Mqd+hUrWCCc2DNQsM=
=PbWg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1295993236_4971P--
