LWN.net Logo

The routing table issue

The routing table issue

Posted Jan 27, 2011 14:48 UTC (Thu) by mstefani (subscriber, #31644)
In reply to: DJB was wrong... even if he was right too. by dan_a
Parent article: LCA: IP address exhaustion and the end of the open net

And how does IPv6 alleviate the routing table explosion?
By assuming an hierarchical internet where everybody but the tier 1 providers are single homed? And to enforce their "reality" they didn't give out provider independent IPv6 addresses? That helped tremendously with acceptance of IPv6 in the enterprise space </irony>. Grudgingly they had to change that policy a couple of years ago. That brought the routing table explosion problem back. And it would make matters even worse due to the increased size of the IP address. The fix? Ignore the problem for now as IPv6 is barely used...

IPv4 addresses run out this year? We run into the routing table issue 8 years ago. Trying to route something smaller than a /24 is an exercise in futility. But we had even fun like "Your IP address is from an IP space that is allocated in /20 blocks; we are filtering out any routes smaller than that. Have a nice day."


(Log in to post comments)

The routing table issue

Posted Jan 27, 2011 15:41 UTC (Thu) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]

> By assuming an hierarchical internet where everybody but the tier 1 providers are single homed?

Actually the (completely unworkable) idea was that people who had multiple providers would simply have multiple IP addresses, and advertise all of them. That *possibly* could have even worked (with a lot of effort) if TCP supported multiple endpoints and transparently switched between them in real-time. But, it doesn't.

The one (pretty minor) remaining thing IPv6 does to help reduce routing-table size is reduce fragmentation of the address space -- a single organization at a single location is less likely to need multiple non-contiguous addresses spaces than in IPv4.

The routing table issue

Posted Jan 28, 2011 7:20 UTC (Fri) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312) [Link]

That *possibly* could have even worked (with a lot of effort) if TCP supported multiple endpoints and transparently switched between them in real-time. But, it doesn't.

That is why they invented SCTP, which does all that and more. Perhaps too much even.

Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds