Re: [sig-policy] prop-101 Returned to mailing list and Newversionposted
On Mar 12, 2012, at 1:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Since the majority of the aggregation in IPv4 is the result of multiple prefixes being assigned to a few large organizations over time for growth
Could you provide a pointer to your analysis that leads you to this conclusion?
> (something like 30% of the routing table is held by the top 10 organizations),
And this is a result of those organizations receiving blocks from the RIRs? I would have thought this meant that a large number folks with PI blocks are having them announced by a small set of providers.
> Making it unnecessarily and hugely expensive for customers to change ISPs is detrimental to the customers and the market in general by reducing competition and lowering the quality of service. Such an action should only be taken if it is absolutely critical to the continued functioning of the network.
Agreed. However, one must be aware of the fact that route deaggregation is a bit like dumping CO2 into the atmosphere: you only notice the problem when it becomes a problem and by then, it becomes quite difficult to stop/fix.
> Bottom line, if we can get rid of the massive IPv4 RIB/FIB mess in the next 5 years, we've got more than enough headroom to allow aggregation to be a concern of the past.
So, just to be clear, you believe people will be turning off IPv4 in the next 5 years in sufficient numbers to free up space for IPv6 prefix growth?
Regards,
-drc