Subj : Re: New one
To   : Michiel van der Vlist
From : Martin List-Petersen
Date : Sat Apr 18 2020 18:50:26

On 17 Apr 2020, Michiel van der Vlist said the following...
 Mv> Can you expand on that? What exactly was a step backward and how and why?

IPv6 was designed in a way, that you can multihome the PAv6 allocation you
get from your ISP, so there was no need for PIv6 really.

So, it was initially not implemented, to keep the routing table small. The
IPv4 routing table is a beast these days. With fragmentation and people
buying /24 blocks left right and center, a full IPv4 routing table is now
nearly 800k entries .. and that's with filtering routes </24

To compare that, the IPv6 global routing table is currently apporx 83k
entries.

The issue, why PIv6 was implemented anyhow .. first in the ARIN and APNIC
regions, then RIPE followed, is that multinationals and a bunch of other
organisations refused to do multihoming that way. One .. very valid reason ..
is that they didn't want to renumber, should they ever change provider. So
the exclusion of provider independant adressing in IPv6 was one of the
reasons, why the move to IPv6 didn't happen in a timely manner.

-M

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Linux/32)
 * Origin: The Alien Mindbenders BBS (2:263/5)

.