|
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)
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 (X<=6). //Per
|