= Сообщение: 6285 из 7402 ============================================= IPV6 = От : Martin List-Petersen 2:263/5 18 Apr 20 18:50:26 Кому : Michiel van der Vlist 18 Apr 20 18:50:26 Тема : Re: New one FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=2:263/5+10d382eb На : area://IPV6?msgid=2:280/5555+5e999737 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ================================== ============================================================================== 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.
