nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?)


From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:45:21 -0700


On Jun 21, 2012, at 5:36 PM, valdis.kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:40:02 +0900, Masataka Ohta said:
Owen DeLong wrote:

What if my ISP just routes my /48? Seems to work quite well,
actually.

Unlike IPv4 with natural boundary of /24, routing table
explosion of IPv6 is a serious scalability problem.

Do you have any *realistic* and *actual* reason to suspect that the IPv6
routing table will "explode" any further than the IPv4 has already? Hint -
Owen's /48 will just get aggregated and announced just like the cable companies
*already* aggregate all those /20s of customer /32s. Unless Owen multihomes - at
which point he's a new entry in the v6 routing tables - but *also* almost
certainly a new entry in the v4 routing table.  Routing table size depends on
the number of AS's, not the amount of address space the routes cover.



Um, unlikely. My /48 is an ARIN direct assignment: 2620:0:930::/48

It's not really aggregable with their other customers.

I do multihome and I am one entry in the v6 routing tables. However, I'm actually
two entries in the v4 routing table. 192.159.10.0/24 and 192.124.40.0/23.

Owen



Current thread: