ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: /48 micro allocations for v6 root servers, was: national security

2003-12-08 14:46:33
% Bill Manning wrote:
% >     /35 routes are being discouraged in favor of /32 entries...
% >     4,064,000,000 addresses to ensure that just one host
% >     -might- have global reachability.  IMHO, a /48 is even 
% >     overkill...  :)
% 
% Just wondering, as I have about IPv4 anycast allocations: why can't we
% designate a block for microallocations, within which prefix length filters
% aren't applied?  The number of routes in the DFZ is the same either way;
% is there any technical reason why /64 or /128 prefixes, or /32 in IPv4,
% can't be used?  I'm not a routing person, so apologies if this is somehow
% unspeakably dumb.
% 
% -zefram

        "we" can.  There is no reason why... routing table slots are
        routing table slots.  It does place the onus on the ISPs to
        be more vigorous in tracking what they will and will not accept
        or propogate. Now, they tend to depend on RIRs to set their 
        routing policies for them... :)

--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).



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