On maandag, okt 13, 2003, at 11:29 Europe/Amsterdam, masataka ohta
wrote:
When IETF produces a broken protocol, don't bash RIRs that
they don't set good policy to operate the protocol. They
can't.
Disagree. A good policy would be making the best of the situation we're
in today. The current RIR IPv6 allocation policy doesn't do that as it
allows for a routing table of 520 million /32 entries, which is more
than what we can realistically expect routers to handle in the future.
IETF and its IPv6 WG, if any, should be bashed, as the problem
was known to exist even before the WG was created.
At least we're trying to fix one part of the problem in this working
group...
Back to your idea of having a full routing table in each host. We've
talked about this and things haven't changed in the mean time. Without
aggregation, this makes sense, as a host then knows what's reachable
and what isn't, and maybe even gets to determine which path to a
certain destination is shorter. But all this very useful information is
hidden behind aggregation. For instance, if you want to determine
whether you want to reach me through my 3ffe:2500:310::/48 or my
2001:888:1dde::/48 prefix, you're not going to be able to see whether
those are reachable, as the /48s aren't going to be in the global
routing table, just 3ffe:2500::/32 and 2001:888::/32.