Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Roger Jørgensen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> Also, I think I remember that most hardware are optimized around that
> /64 boundary, how will this affect newer chipset and hardware? Should they
> optimize their hardware to route anything from /8 to /128? Sounds very
> expensive and not something that will make IPv6 more popular.
>

I'm fine with systems being optimized for /64, they just can't ignore or
assume there will never be anything longer than /64. If they assume there
will never be any prefixes longer than /64, that's not optimizing for /64,
that's building a broken system. Optimizing for /64 is assuming something
like approximately 60-75% of prefixes will be /64 or shorter, maybe even
80-90% for that matter, but the latter is probably a little over optimized
in my opinion.

To one extent that's already covered in BCP198/RFC7608, this draft is more
about the IID length, but they are really just opposite sides of the same
coin.

Thanks.
-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================