Please dont CC your messages to local-ir@ripe.net. Its off topic there. Thank you ---------------------------------------------------------------- To: peter@demon.net Cc: nathan@netrail.net, dsiegel@net99.net, jon@branch.com, sob@academ.com, bwatson@mci.net, jerry@fc.net, inet-access@earth.com, HANK@taunivm.tau.ac.il, nanog@merit.edu, local-ir@ripe.net, iap@vma.cc.nd.edu, yakov@cisco.com Subject: Re: CIDR FAQ Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 05:47:43 PDT From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com> Peter,

BTW - I have not studied the RFC's - so what will IPv6 do for us in the contect of routeing aggregation and latger boxes etc ?

Couple of observations: 1. The ability to aggregate routing information depends on how addresses are assigned, but does not depend on whether addresses are 32 bits wide or 128 bits wide. 2. IPv6 address allocation architecture (see draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicst-addr-allo-01.txt) is the same as IPv4. (just so that folks who read this note would have no doubts, the IPv6 Address Allocation Architecture document was written by Tony Li and myself - the same people who wrote the CIDR Address Allocation Architecture document). Conclusion: In the area of routing aggregation IPv6 will do for us *exactly the same* as what IPv4 does. Yakov. Andreas Fink --------------------------------------------------------------------- Ping Net GmbH, Dorfstrasse 21, 8902 Urdorf, Switzerland afink@ping.ch http://www.ping.ch/ Tel: 01-7358333 Fax: 01-7358334 Administration: admin@ping.ch Tech Support: support@ping.ch --------------------------------------------------------------------- Ping Net Sarl, World Trade Cent er, Av. Gratta Paille 2, 1000 Lausanne 30, Switzerland. Tel: 021-6411339 Fax: 021-6411310 ---------------------------------------------------------------------