North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)

  • From: Per Heldal
  • Date: Mon Oct 17 15:44:03 2005

mon, 17,.10.2005 kl. 11.29 -0700, Fred Baker:
> OK. What you just described is akin to an enterprise network with a  
> default route. It's also akin to the way DNS works.

No default, just one or more *potential* routes.

Your input is appreciated, and yes I'm very much aware that many people
who maintain solutions that assume full/total control of the entire
routing-table will be screaming bloody murder if that is going to
change. Further details about future inter-domain-routing concepts
belong in other fora (e.g. ietf's inter-domain-routing wg).

The long-term operational impact is that the current
inter-domain-routing concepts (BGP etc) don't scale indefinitely and
will have to be changed some time in the future. Thus expect the size of
the routing-table to be eliminated from the list of limiting factors, or
that the bar is considerably raised. 


Note that I'm not saying that nothing should be done to preserve and
optimise the use of the resources that are available today just because
there will be something better available in a distant future. I'm in
favor of the most restrictive allocation policies in place today. The
development of the internet has for a long time been based on finding
better ways to use available resources (CIDR anyone). To me a natural
next-step in that process is for RIR's to start reclaiming unused v4
address-blocks, or at least start collect data to document that space is
not being used (if they're not already doing so). E.g prevously
announced address-blocks that has disappeared from the global
routing-table for more than X months should go back to the RIR-pool