Re: Provider Independent addressing format drafts

[itojun@iijlab.net]

>The updates to the provider independent address format & usage drafts
>are available at:
>http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-fmt-01.txt
>http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-use-01.txt

	I still don't understand how PI address format can be routed in
	currently-practiced routing infrastructure.  PI address, based on
	physical location can behave very poorly against aggregation.
	example:
	    I'm using 1fff:ffff:ffff::/48 and connected to ISP A, while
	    my neighbor is using 1fff:ffff:fffe::/48 and connected to ISP B.
	    ISP A and B needs to exchange /48 routes to route between us.
	I believe we end up having 2^44 routes in the routing system with
	the PI address allocation.  are there any magic I'm missing?
	examples given in the drafts did not convince me at all.

	another comment - in the document, it is mentioned that the allocation
	of a single /48 must be solved by "local jurisdiction".
	I don't think it workable for highly populated area (think of NY, tokyo,
	whatever), where skyscrapers make hundreds of companies to share the
	same geographical location.  it may work for less populated area
	(imagine any farms in middle-of-nowhere).

itojun