Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes?

[Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>]

On 12/8/2010 4:12 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> IMHO, a more ideal way to do this would be to add 32 bits to the
> packet header for "destination ASN" and do IDR based on that,
> but, changing the packet header at this time is hard and would
> require a new IP version number.

My only problem with this is how to get certain percentages of traffic 
to come through different transits. I realize I could specify a separate 
ASN, and balance traffic based on ASN instead of network, but I'm not 
sure what is saved.

ie, 4 ASNs vs 4 networks? The other issue is that networks are not all 
equal. Thought I presume you could shift networks around to different 
ASNs to accomplish this.

My hope is that the nature of v6 will actually reduce the routing table 
naturally (even though we are storing larger prefixes). Handing out 
address space on a 3-6 month curve is what has made it a nightmare. I'm 
going to go out on a limb (and not read the last BGP summary reports) 
and say that ISPs being assigned fragmented space has caused more 
routing table bloat than deaggregation for traffic engineering.


Jack