[89104] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Thu Mar 2 14:20:21 2006
In-Reply-To: <4406BAD0.5010703@nrg4u.com>
Cc: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>, Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>,
David Barak <thegameiam@yahoo.com>, Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>,
NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:19:52 -0500
To: Andre Oppermann <nanog-list@nrg4u.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Does this mean that you support 2005-1, or do you think a new ARIN
proposal is needed ?
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
On Mar 2, 2006, at 4:28 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>
> 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
