Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all - /64 FIB burden oops...

Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au> Sun, 19 August 2007 00:56 UTC

Return-path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMZ5o-0006i6-OK; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:56:36 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMZ5n-0006i0-5a for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:56:35 -0400
Received: from gair.firstpr.com.au ([150.101.162.123]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMZ5l-0006zp-7e for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:56:35 -0400
Received: from [10.0.0.8] (zita.firstpr.com.au [10.0.0.8]) by gair.firstpr.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7721159E3E; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:56:31 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <46C7952A.70102@firstpr.com.au>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:56:10 +1000
From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
Organization: First Principles
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <D03E4899F2FB3D4C8464E8C76B3B68B0E18022@E03MVC4-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> <46C65DAA.70707@firstpr.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <46C65DAA.70707@firstpr.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2
Subject: Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all - /64 FIB burden oops...
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

I retract what I wrote in a previous message about DFZ routers
needing to look at 64 bits of the packet's destination address.

I misunderstood the text:

> LIR's may assign blocks in the range of /48 to /64 to end sites.
> All assignments made by LIR's should meet a minimum HD-Ratio of
> .25.
>
> * /64 - Site needing only a single subnet.
> * /60 - Site with 2-3 subnets initially.
> * /56 - Site with 4-7 subnets initially.
> * /52 - Site with 8-15 subnets initially.
> * /48 - Site with 16+ subnets initially.

from:

  http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/ppml/2007-August/008521.html

as referring to RIRs.

This proposal doesn't lead to any greater burden on FIBs of DFZ
routers, but I still think the /48 PI end-user assignments are
pretty hard on the routers.

Each VoIP call between hosts in two /48 prefixes with 16 DFZ routers
en-route involves those routers collectively working through this
many bits:

  50 * 2 * 48 * 16 = 76,800 bits!

  - Robin


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf