Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@martin.fl.us> writes: | > Aggregation buys time, that's it. Aggregation does not make the | > current routing methods any more scalable. | | In IPv4 yes, because you can't have perfect aggregation, too much network | multihoming and old prefixes and it's to painful to change address blocks. | | In IPv6, if implimented right aggregation provides for virtually limitless | scalability for unicast traffic. Perfectly aggregated networks are star-shaped. Any more complicated topology cannot be perfectly aggregated. In real networks, aggregation at best follows a "reasonable" trade-off between optimizing and stabilizing route selection. Not everyone will agree on what is a "reasonable" balance. Result: some people unhappy about suboptimal routing ("my packets to my neighbour across the street go through another country") and some people unhappy about too-great dynamicism ("damn, time to upgrade to a faster processor, more memory, faster memory, etc etc etc"). This is a result of the CIDR addressing architecture and is INDEPENDENT OF THE NUMBER OF BITS IN AN ADDRESS. Sean.