[2 billion cell phones in the next 95 years seems on the low side.] On 16 sep 2008, at 17:12, Templin, Fred L wrote:
Who says there needs to be growth in the number of IPv6 BGP routes? If we map/encaps the entire IPv6 space as an overlay over the existing IPv4 Internet, we keep IPv6 prefixes out of the BGP routing tables and we get to scale through mapping w/o affecting routing scaling.
There still needs to be a box that takes an IPv6 packet and decides where that packet should go based on its destination address and therefore this box needs to run a protocol to learn which address prefixes go where.
The only thing that such an overlay buys us over multiprotocol BGP is that the routing in the overlay network can be less dynamic because it doesn't have to know about the status of the network in the middle. If the destination is single homed the mapping can even be static but if the destination is multihomed then the mapping must still react to a smaller set of routing changes.
(One might observe that if BGP had been designed better those same advantages could have been realized without an overlay or new protocols.)
-- 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