Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?

[Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>]

Michael Bolton via NANOG wrote:

> We would benefit from advertising /25's but it hurt's more
> than it helps.

That is, IPv6 really hurts.

> I'm in the alarm industry and they still haven't started adopting
> IPv6. If we allow /25 subnets, some industries will never change. In
> a sense, we have to “force” them to change.

FYI, WRT routing table bloat, IPv6 having a lot longer minimum
allocation prefix than /24 (which forbid operators cut IPv6
prefixes longer than /24), that is, a lot beyond direct SRAM
look up, and, worse, needing longer TCAM word size (64 or 128
bits?) than IPv4, is, in a not so long run, a lot lot worse
than IPv4.

                                                Masataka Ohta