Hello Wilfried, On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet < Woeber@cc.univie.ac.at> wrote:
Turchanyi Geza wrote: [...]
So the hardwired limit of 0.5M IPv4 routes and 0.25k IPv6 does not allow a few hundred thousands more IPv6 routes at all (not even would allow an 0.25M IPv6 limit) -- and speed of processing is an other issue...
Even right now a large proportion of the router boxes on the Internet are *not* capable of dealing with the full routing table in the DFZ. This has been the case for many years already, btw. Still the 'net was and is pretty healthy and packets get shipped to the correct destination.
Well, what you say is true, however, it is easy to interpret it in a wrong way. What I says: before accepteng a "principle", or policy, we should be able to understand, at least roughly, the financial consequences. I also says, that I seriously doubt that the PI space allocation should be "liberized" in order to push through the IPv6 deployment. The first real question, what will be, or might be the consequence if DFZ routing table growth further significantly. Please keep in your calculation that an IPv6 entry need twice as much address space in the routing table than an IPv4 entries. The conseqences are two folds: SLOW DOWN in the routing and forced upgrade of ALL routing cards that are able to support "only" 0,5M IPv4 routing entries AND are involved in DFZ zone handling. I think, it would be crucial to know how many router cards would be included in the Internet today. I made a very a rough estimation: 300 000 cards. Of course, there are much more cards in the backbones. May be I am wrong, however, please do not neglect this issue. Let's clarify first: roughly how many router cards MUST be upgraded if the typical 0,5M limit reached (counting twice en IPv6 enty). In parallel, we should better understand the slow-down consequences as well.
[...]
Strict limits must be kept.
The above mentionned limits are the strict limits, not to forget. http://labs.ripe.net/Members/gih/routing-2011 The picture of Geoff Huston shows that we are getting too close to the typical existing limits.
I still believe that it is the ISPs' job to manage the DFZ and to decide which prefixes to accept - or maybe not. I am pretty sure that the PI address blocks are taken from a well-documented space, so it is up to the (individual) ISP(s) to manage their routing environment.
NO, we should not dreams about policy blindly and we should not separate our knowledge and question marks.
I do not see a mandate for the policy and/or the NCC to prohibit a (maybe small) number of participants from doing "the right thing" - from their point of view.
We are responsible for the problems provoked by the grows of the Internet.
In the very end, the money that keeps the IPSs going and earning money is coming from customers, isn't it? :-)
Well, this statement might be read that my approach is not customer oriented enough. In opposite, it is. I do not want to suggest "solutions" for customers that would slow down the Internet and increase seriously the price of the service if these "solutions" would not be used just in very exeptional case. Slowing down the internet is not customer freindly at all. Increasing the service price would be? I am pretty sure that IPv6 PI space needed only in very exeptional cases, and I also pretty sure that we MUST say this to everybody clearly and without delay. Your freind since 20 years, Géza