nanog mailing list archives
Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN)
From: "cja () daydream com" <packetgrrl () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:25:56 -0700
If you look at Gert Doering's slides that I presented at NANOG (in the IPv6 Deployment Experiences track) I believe it is 1.4 prefixes per ASN in IPv6 and something like 10.5 prefixes per ASN in IPv4. There are also descriptions of the reasons for some of these multiple advertisements in IPv6 as well as how many ASNs have just one and how many have 2 etc. The slides are here http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog51/presentations/Monday/NANOG51.Talk13.Aronson-doring-v6-table.pdf Enjoy! -----Cathy On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
On Feb 7, 2011, at 12:19 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:...On the other hand, when we can deprecate global routing of IPv4, we will see an earth shattering improvement as the current 10:1 prefix to provider ratio (300,000 prefixes for ~30,000 active ASNs) drops to something more like 2:1 in IPv6 due to providers not having to constantly run back to the RIR for additional slow-start allocations. OwenI suspect as we start seeing the CIDR report for IPv6, we'll see that ASNs are announcing considerably more prefixes than that, in order to localize traffic better. I don't think it'll be 300,000 prefixes, but I'd be willing to bet it'll be more than 100,000--not exactly "earth shattering improvement". Matt (hopeless deaggregator)Currently: 3,134 IPv6 ASNs active. Currently: 4,265 IPv6 prefixes. Looks like less than 2:1 to me. That's as close as I think I can get to an IPv6 CIDR report for the moment. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market, (continued)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market John Levine (Feb 06)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Dorn Hetzel (Feb 06)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Jack Bates (Feb 06)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Eliot Lear (Feb 08)
- RE: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Jamie Bowden (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) William Herrin (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Jack Bates (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Owen DeLong (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Matthew Petach (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Owen DeLong (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) cja () daydream com (Feb 07)
- RE: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Koch, Andrew (Feb 07)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market (was: Using IPv6 withprefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN) Matthew Petach (Feb 08)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Neil Harris (Feb 08)
- Re: What's really needed is a routing slot market Paul Timmins (Feb 08)
- Re: Telco style routing, was What's really needed is a routing slot market John Levine (Feb 08)
- RE: Telco style routing, was What's really needed is a routing slot market Nathan Eisenberg (Feb 08)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- RE: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Nathan Eisenberg (Feb 05)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN Jack Bates (Feb 05)
