ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re[4]: IPv6 addressing limitations (was "national security")

2003-12-03 17:44:35
Iljitsch van Beijnum writes:

You seem to assume that being frugal with address
space would make it possible to use addresess that
are much smaller than 128 bits.

I assume that if we are getting by with 2^32 addresses now, we don't
need 2^93 times that many any time in the foreseeable future.

This might have been the case if efficiency in address
allocation were the only issue we'd have to deal with.

If we continue to throw away address space like this, it will be.
That's fully 1/8 of the _entire_ 2^128 addresses.

But more important are routing limitations. We need
to keep the size of the global routing table in check,
which means "wasting" a good deal of address space. Even
in IPv4, where addresses are considered at least somewhat
scarce, a significant part of all possible addresses is lost
because of this.

Maybe it's time to find a different way to route.






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>