[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for profit, webhosting and route deaggregation
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for profit, webhosting and route deaggregation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for profit, webhosting and route deaggregation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Thu Mar 3 12:36:23 CET 2011
> So IPv4 isn't that bad, even technically, if you think about it. But > it turns out that the current IPv6 allocation practice prevents > running with aggregated FIBs---there's a hole after each PA > allocation. The hole is visible because you're expected to generated > ICMP unreachables for packets target there, so you can't lump two PA > prefixes together, even if they share the same next hop. This is yet > another case of premature optimization gone wrong. This would mean that one ISP de-aggregating their /32 won't cause many problems. Those could be auto-aggregated in the FIB. - Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for profit, webhosting and route deaggregation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI for profit, webhosting and route deaggregation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]