Re: IPv6 and the "average user"

Matthew J Ghio (
Mon, 25 Nov 1996 20:46:25 -0500 (EST) (Bernd Eckenfels) wrote:

> Ummm.. since the routing tables are already too full I dont see a chance to
> handel all the ipv4 routes and New routes for 128Bit Addresses without some
> rediesigned policy. It is simply not pssible to carry very single Class-C
> net in the routing tables. Therefoe enforcing NetBlocks for providers is a
> very good decission to enable Backbone routers to carry on their taks.

To store a single route/gateway for every possible class C network would
take less than 8 megabytes of memory, which is quite possible to do.
The problem is that if you don't have enough additional memory to store
multiple routes, it makes the network unreliable.

So, with 64MB or so, it's possbile to store fairly complete routing
tables for IPv4. The problem is the larger address blocks of IPv6.
(And also that some older routers can't use so many simms. This is not
really a problem for most Linux systems tho.)