North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Michael.Dillon
  • Date: Mon Oct 17 07:08:28 2005

> They've been asking for that as well I think. I certainly don't want to
> have 1M+ routes for JUST the Internet to worry about anytime soon, I'd
> hate to see over 300k for real Internet routes anytime soon :( Much of
> today's hardware doesn't seem so happy around that number :( Operators 
> IETF need to hit a middle ground.

There are 437 cities of 1 million or more population. There are
roughly 5,000 cities of over 100,000 population. And there are
3,047,000 named communities in the world. 

Seems to me that the number of routes in the global routing
table should logically be closer to 5,000 than to 3,000,000.

> I'm not sure I agree that the end state is 100% multihoming. I can
> certainly agree that more multihoming is coming. Many more people are
> pushing for multihoming today than in previous years, apparently telco
> instability (financial not technical) is/has driven this :) (among other
> things I'm sure)

I agree that the end state is *NOT* 100% multihoming. It is 
too complex for most people and there is no business 
justification for it. But an awful lot of business customers
will be able to justify multihoming. That is part and parcel
of the "mission critical" Internet.

--Michael Dillon