This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Mon Apr 24 10:59:47 CEST 2006
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:52:43AM +0200, Oliver Bartels wrote:
> This argument is absolutely correct, the impact on the BGP table
> will be negligible and can - as proven by IPv4 - be handled by modern
> routing hardware, thus:
Does someone have numbers on the amount of IPv6 prefixes that currently
deployed Cisco and Juniper routers can handle?
I know that the Cisco Sup720/3B can handle 256k routes for IPv4+IPv6
*together* (TCAM space), which limits the "unlimited growth of IPv6"
a bit (but which can be fixed by upgrading to 3BXL).
Please let's not discuss "how stupid router vendors are" now, just
collect facts - there must be some upper limits in the hardware for
GSR line cards and Juniper IPII-ASICs as well.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 92315
SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0
D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]