Re: [RRG] comments on IVIP Conceptual Summary and Analysis documents

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Philip,

Thanks very much for your comments.  I will respond fully as soon as
I can - hopefully in the next few days.

The question of how many end-users could be served from a single
Mapped Address Block (a single BGP advertised prefix, which is
managed by Ivip) is important, but depends on many assumptions.

Broadly speaking, MABs could be quite large, such as /12 or /16 and
many end users would be happy with one, or four, or 16 or sometimes
256 IP addresses.  Hosting companies and some other end-users with
lots of servers, or desktop machines they didn't want to put behind
NAT, would need more space, of course.

The end-users served by a map-encap scheme will include large
numbers of end-users whose address space requirements are quite
modest - tiny by comparison with the space used by current PI
end-users with ASNs.

This will be particularly the case with mobility, where most
end-users would probably be happy with a single IPv4 address.

So there could be 64k happy end-users in a single /16 MAB.

As long as the figure averages 5 or 10 or more end-users per MAB, I
think we should consider this worthwhile progress.


   - Robin


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg