[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    (IPng 3712) Site-level aggregators in draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-aggr-00.txt
From:       Erik Nordmark <nordmark () jurassic>
Date:       1997-05-27 20:13:59
[Download RAW message or body]


In the draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-aggr-00.txt the Site-Level Aggregator(s)
are described. Would it make sense to add a reference to RFC-1219
as a possible technique for partitioning this field in a hierahical
fashion while allowing for growth?

It would be good it we could add some recommendations so that large sites
can make informed decisions about how to address their internal topology.
Without some more concrete examples I'm concerned that sites will start off
with a flat "subnet" number space for IPv6 (subnet 0, 1, 2, ...). 
For some (many?) large sites such a scheme 
will scale a lot less than internal IPv4 subnetting which does provide 
a two-level internal hierarchy today in those sites.

Thus should we issue a variant of RFC-1219 that describes how to do
a two-level hiearchy in the site-level aggregator field?

   Erik


RFC-1219 P. Tsuchiya "On the assignment of subnet numbers"

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]