nanog mailing list archives
Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI]
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:58:05 -0800
--On Monday, November 29, 2004 5:41 PM +0100 Jeroen Massar <jeroen () unfix org> wrote:
Duh... You're making my point for me. There won't be 2^32 routes from 1 routeOn Mon, 2004-11-29 at 08:35 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:> Also, with 32bit ASN's, also expect upto 2^32 routes in your routing > table when each and every ASN would at least send 1 route and of course > there will be ASN's sending multiple routes. > Only if EVERY ASN were allocated and active.*BUZZZ* ASN's are a globally unique resource, you not seeing it does not mean that it is not in use. For that matter anything from a prefix to a ASN that any of the RIR's hands out does not have to show up on the public internet, it could even be used by a single company internally, just like RFC1918 prefixes, or on a VPN etc. <SNIP>
per ASN unless ALL 2^32 ASNs are assigned.Further, lots of ASNs get used for things that don't put routes in the global
table. (If I can't see it, it's not in the global table).
Which damage might that be? The prefixes are not supposed to be put in the global routing table and even if people did, with 16bit ASN you only allow 65536 routes, which is less than current IPv4... oops let's disable repeat mode... also see my nice comment on 6to4, that is more useful if you want a globally unique /48 for sure, that is if you really 'own' the IPv4 space of that prefix.
But, that "should" becomes a purely artificial barrier which will be eliminated by market economics. Finally, with the limitations of 16 bit ASNs (which we will surpass regardless of reclamation), we won't likely end up with 1 prefix per ASN. The prefixes will be out there regardless of the number of ASNs that end up originating them.
For that matter Ford and some other /8's are only 2002:13::/24, which is the same size as the 6bone space that was handed out early on. Do also realize that if this all becomes a peep-up and the RIR's (or actually IANA) runs out of space that they can try all over 7 more times, *that* is how much IPv6 space is available.
And? Owen -- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI, (continued)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI Cliff Albert (Nov 28)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 28)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI Cliff Albert (Nov 28)
- 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Pekka Savola (Nov 28)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Daniel Roesen (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Cliff Albert (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Jeroen Massar (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Jeroen Massar (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Jeroen Massar (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Pekka Savola (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Pekka Savola (Nov 29)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Owen DeLong (Nov 30)
- Message not available
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) Owen DeLong (Nov 30)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) Elmar K. Bins (Nov 30)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Michael . Dillon (Nov 30)
- Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI] Andre Oppermann (Nov 30)
- Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda, yadda] Michael . Dillon (Nov 30)