[discuss] we need to fix what may be broken
bzs at world.std.com
Sat Apr 19 06:25:48 UTC 2014
On April 18, 2014 at 17:53 Lee at asgard.org (Lee Howard) wrote:
> On 4/18/14 4:46 PM, "Barry Shein" <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:
> >In theory you could put the entire nation of China (just an example)
> >behind one modest IPv6 block and no one would want for IPv6 address
> >space at least for the foreseeable future. So, want to get to China?
> >One route entry, they take care of further distribution on their
> >"campus" (i.e., China.)
> I don't understand the routing table entry. How does a country have a next
> How do five autonomous companies with hundreds of millions of hosts, each,
> and separate administrative control, share an ASN with each other and
> hundreds of other companies with only millions of users each?
> When you say "they take care of further distribution," who are "they?"
> And whence do they distribute? Do you require all of China to have a
> single access connection?
> Does Taiwan share that block, or get their own?
"In theory" is supposed to cover a lot of sins.
But "they" would be someone like China Telecom.
At that point they have no particular need for IANA ASNs within the
country, they could duplicate all that however they like, no one will
see those BGP announcements but themselves.
All they would need in order to speak to the outside world is IANA
(for want of a better authority to name) IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
It was a hypothetical sledgehammer way to reduce the routing table.
Someone asked what could be done if the routing table were collapsing.
I suggested one easy thing that could be done: Reduce the number of
routing table entries by fiat.
We do that in the core already by limiting the longest prefix so it's
not completely far-fetched, just extrapolative.
The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
More information about the discuss