[294] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CIDR FAQ
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yakov Rekhter)
Wed Aug 16 09:00:59 1995
To: peter@demon.net
cc: nathan@netrail.net, dsiegel@net99.net, jon@branch.com, sob@academ.com,
bwatson@mci.net, jerry@fc.net, inet-access@earth.com,
HANK@taunivm.tau.ac.il, nanog@merit.edu, local-ir@ripe.net,
iap@vma.cc.nd.edu, yakov@cisco.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 95 09:13:10 BST."
<9508160913.aa27874@office.demon.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 05:47:43 PDT
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
Peter,
>
> BTW - I have not studied the RFC's - so what will IPv6 do for us in
> the contect of routeing aggregation and latger boxes etc ?
>
Couple of observations:
1. The ability to aggregate routing information depends
on how addresses are assigned, but does not depend on whether
addresses are 32 bits wide or 128 bits wide.
2. IPv6 address allocation architecture (see
draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicst-addr-allo-01.txt) is the same as IPv4.
(just so that folks who read this note would have no doubts,
the IPv6 Address Allocation Architecture document was written
by Tony Li and myself - the same people who wrote the CIDR Address
Allocation Architecture document).
Conclusion:
In the area of routing aggregation IPv6 will do for us *exactly the same*
as what IPv4 does.
Yakov.
