Re: shim6 @ NANOG

From: (no name) (no email)
Date: Mon Mar 06 2006 - 04:57:39 EST

  • Next message: Mikael Abrahamsson: "Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne)"

    > I can tell you this: the only scalable solutions
    > on the horizon are:
    >
    > - moving multihoming related state out of the DFZ (this is what shim6
    > does)

    This is what geo-topological addressing does.

    > - remove the requirement that every DFZ router carries every prefix,
    > which can't be done as long as PI blocks sit at the top of the
    > addressing hierarchy

    Geotop addressing does this also because only a few
    aggregates are in the DFZ. The detail is elsewhere.

    > The closest thing to a magic, pain-free solution would be to allocate
    > PI blocks such that it's possible to aggregate them together and
    > ignore the more specifics for far away regions of the world, so that
    > in 2030 you don't have to carry 60000 Chinese PI blocks world wide
    > that all sit behind the same Great Firewall anyway,

    Exactly!

    And this doesn't need to be done in a mandatory way. It
    can be done so that large providers can continue to use
    provider-aggregatable addresses. Geotop addressing is
    one of those 80-20 solutions where the largest 20% of
    providers mostly use classic IPv6 address but the other
    80% of smaller multihomers use geotopologically aggregatable
    addresses.

    --Michael Dillon


  • Next message: Mikael Abrahamsson: "Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne)"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD