Nick Hilliard wrote:
It merely means difference of a small constant factor.
I disagree. Most ISPs I know of announce a large number of non- contiguous address blocks. With ipv6, this will drop to just one or two in the short term; longer term, it will grow, but not even nearly at the same rate as ipv4 allocations.
According to your favourite:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/presentations/ripe52-plenary-bgp-r...
each ISP announces, in average, about 8 blocks, which is the small constant factor.
IPv4 routing table is already too large that its convergence is prohibitively slow.
Geoff Huston's talk about this at RIPE was rather interesting. Yes, the routing table will grow. But that's only part of the problem;
So, you have found the problem. That's enough to answer the quesiton in your previous mail of: What's the problem here??
Not at all. If the end-user disappears, its entries in global routing tables are tackled automatically.
The prefix announcement disappears, but the space is lost to the available address pool forever (under current rules).
It's not a serious issue for IPv6 and no urgent response necessary, though you said in your previous mail Problem #1 is a really serious issue and needs to be tackled urgently. Masataka Ohta