On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:55 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
On 03/05/2010 05:24 AM, William Herrin wrote:
Joel made a remarkable assertion that non-aggregable assignments to end users, the ones still needed for multihoming, would go down under IPv6.
A couple of months ago my then employer went to arin to get a direct v6 assignmentment. on the basis of the number of pops the resulting assignment was a /43. It'll be a while I imagine before another prefix is required.
Ah, I follow your reasoning. I'll be interested to learn whether the numbers agree. ARIN staff has reported before that the vast majority of IPv4 end user assignments go to organizations which do not subsequently return for additional assignments. In general it's the ISPs who come back for more allocations... I wonder if the minority of end-user orgs who do request additional space request enough additional blocks to make a difference in the routing tables.
Well, between that, and, the fact that ISPs should be asking for additional space a _LOT_ less frequently and all cases should be more likely to get an aggregable expansion of their allocation/assignment now that we are delegating by bisection, I think both of those things will reduce the rate at which growth within organizations increases the routing table by quite a bit. Owen