Each unit of mask length increase doubles the size of the table theoretically.
About 60% of the table is /24 routes.
Just going to /25 will probably double the table size.
Not sure I'd like to extrapolate the estimate out to /27.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 00:25:55 +0300
From: VOLKAN SAL?H <volkan.salih.06@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
hello,
I believe, ISPs should also allow ipv4 prefixes with length between
/25-/27 instead of limiting maximum length to /24..
I also believe that RIRs and LIRs should allocate /27s which has 32 IPv4
address. considering IPv4 world is now mostly NAT'ed, 32 IPv4s are
sufficient for most of the small and medium sized organizations and also
home office workers like youtubers, and professional gamers and webmasters!
It is because BGP research and experiment networks can not get /24 due
to high IPv4 prices, but they have to get an IPv4 prefix to learn BGP in
IPv4 world.
What do you think about this?
What could be done here?
Is it unacceptable; considering most big networks that do
full-table-routing also use multi-core routers with lots of RAM? those
would probably handle /27s and while small networks mostly use default
routing, it should be reasonable to allow /25-/27?
Thanks for reading, regards..