[163971] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /25's prefixes announced into global routing table?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Jun 22 01:48:36 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <51C533F5.1080209@monmotha.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 07:45:21 +0200
To: Brandon Martin <lists.nanog@monmotha.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jun 22, 2013, at 7:19 AM, Brandon Martin <lists.nanog@monmotha.net> =
wrote:
> On 06/22/2013 12:44 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> The forwarding hardware is generally going to be the limit, and
>>>> that's going to be painful enough as we approach a half million
>>>> prefixes.
>>>=20
>>> True. And that's why we must avoid IPv6.
>>=20
>> This is not only wrong, it makes no sense whatsoever.
>>=20
>=20
>=20
> So here's a question: has anyone done any musings/reasearch on how big =
of a global IPv6 table we could expect given current policies if IPv6 =
were as widely deployed and used as IPv4 (or if IPv4 didn't exist)?
> --=20
> Brandon Martin
Yes=85 It will probably settle out somewhere around 100-125K routes.
Owen
