[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Thoughts on the RRG/Routing Space Problem
On 30 nov 2007, at 11:00, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Along your lines of a split, I like the idea of using 4000::/3 for
LISP-mapped EIDs and deprecating PI space in 2000::/3. It's a bit
tougher to apply the same split to v4 since there won't be any /8s
left by the time a solution is standardized...
Hm, if that's true, does it make sense to even bother working on all
of this for IPv4?
But you could use IPv6 for locator space even for IPv4 end-user PI
And reclaiming 240.0.0.0/4 for use as locator addresses within ISP
networks seems possible for at least some values of "possible".
However, I disagree that it's necessary or even useful to make a
syntactical distinction between existing PI space, the new type of PI
space and locator space. Anything that's in the BGP tables is either
existing PI space or locator space. Which of the two isn't terribly
interesing. Anything that's not in the BGP tables is either unused or
new PI space so it can safely be routed to an encapsulation device.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.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