Been resisting adding to this thread... But if the assumption is that networks will always eventually totally deaggregate to the maximum, we're screwed. Routing IPv4 /32s would be nothing. The current practice of accepting /48s could swell to about 2^(48 - 3) = 2^45 = 35184372088832.
What will prevent unrestricted growth of the IPv6 table if operators push everything out to /48 "to counter hijacks" or other misguided reasons? On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 8:14 AM Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > If you maximally disaggregate to /24, you end up with about 12M fib > entries. At /25 this doubles and you double it again for every bit you move > right. > > At /24, we are on borrowed time without walking right. Also, the CPU in > most routers won’t handle the churn of a 10M prefix RIB. > > Owen > > > > On Oct 4, 2023, at 03:15, Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 10/4/23 12:11, Musa Stephen Honlue wrote: > >> > >> Which one is easier, > >> > >> 1. Convincing the tens of thousands of network operators and equipment > vendors to modify configs and code to accept more specifics than /24, or > > > > Equipment vendors can already support 10 million entries in FIB. They > just ask for a little bit of cash for it. > > > > Mark. > > >
