[301] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CIDR FAQ
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Aug 16 12:41:03 1995
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 09:33:36 -0700
From: owen@DeLong.SJ.CA.US (Owen DeLong)
To: yakov@cisco.com
Cc: inet-access@earth.com, nanog@merit.edu, local-ir@ripe.net
> 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.
>
With one notable exception.... No allocation legacies. That is there aren't
any old badly-distributed ipv6 addresses floating around. This means that
ipv6 aggregation should be substantially more effective than ipv4 CIDR has
been.
> Yakov.
>
Owen
