[89070] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andre Oppermann)
Thu Mar 2 04:29:18 2006
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:28:48 +0100
From: Andre Oppermann <nanog-list@nrg4u.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>,
David Barak <thegameiam@yahoo.com>, Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>,
NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <6E01C7CAE581D814B9A7B560@imac-en0.delong.sj.ca.us>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Owen DeLong wrote:
>>Please don't mix up addressing and routing. "PI addressing" as you
>>mention is addressing. SHIM6 will become a routing trick.
>>
>
> I think that is overly pessimistic. I would say that SHIM6 _MAY_
> become a routing trick, but, so far, SHIM6 is a still-born piece
> of overly complicated vaporware of minimal operational value, if any.
>
> Personally, I think a better solution is to stop overloading IDR
> meaning onto IP addresses and use ASNs for IDR and prefixes for
> intradomain routing only.
Full ACK! For the IDR we then can use perfect match lookups which
scale very well and pretty cheaply to many millions of table entries.
BGP scales very well too if you've got a decent cpu in your router.
Our OpenBGPD easily does 30 flapping constandly full-feeds with 1 million
routes each.
Lets get pragmatic and realistic!
--
Andre
