[governance] NTIA statement on IP addressing - broadly supportive of RIRs

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

That would be news to Geoff Huston and Philip Smith, who have been publishing the CIDR report for years, requesting ASNs to aggregate their v4 announcements.  www.cidr-report.org

Full routing tables due to overly prolific announcements is already a concern with v4 - and it remains to be seen how routing tables look and how you feel like when you are faced with periodic router upgrade bills just to deal with exploding routing table size.

In other words - routing table bloat definitely remains a problem, even with newer and more powerful routers.

--srs (iPad)

On 05-Dec-2012, at 20:29, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Yes, but there are very few levels of hierarchy, nothing like what was expected in 1993/95.  By and large the structure is flat and the tables are large and the routers can handle it, especially when you consider that routing is mostly based on AS numbers and peering rather than on prefix length.
> 
> Also living in a world where routers need to support both v6 routing information tables and v4 routing information tables, a few extra prefixes are not anybody's routing problem these 
>> 
>> 
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t