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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2009-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco d'Itri
md at Linux.IT
Tue Apr 7 16:08:33 CEST 2009
On Apr 07, Max Tulyev <president at ukraine.su> wrote: > I hear from Juniper they was capable of 5M routes an year ago. > > I think, 2020 year hardware should be capable about 500M prefixes easy. You keep missing the point. Even if we junk the Sup720-3BXL then the problem will be processing the updates without resorting again to dampening. -- ciao, Marco -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20090407/fbf98e1f/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]