[135538] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Jan 26 12:08:55 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <63907.1295993236@localhost>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:05:48 -0800
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 25, 2011, at 2:07 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> 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.
>>=20
>> Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
>>=20
>> "Dude, there are 256 /8 in IPv4."
>>=20
>> "640k ought to be enough for anyone."
>>=20
>> People can mismange anything into oblivion. IPv6 will end up the =
same =20
>> mess IPv4 has become. (granted, it should take more than 30 years =
this =20
>> time.)
>=20
> To burn through all the /48s in 100 years, we'll have to use them up
> at the rate of 89,255 *per second*.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
This presumes that we don't run out of /48s by installing them in =
routers a /20 at a time.
Owen
