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] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Tue Oct 4 19:35:58 CEST 2011
On 04/10/2011 18:14, Havard Eidnes wrote: > Well... So far Cisco and Juniper have been able to piggyback their > use of TCAM resources with what's available in the marketplace. From > what I've picked up from reputable sources, we're pushing the limits, > and Moore's law does not appear to apply to the rather specialized > market of humungous TCAM chips. TCAM is not the only lookup system suitable for packet forwarding lookups: Juniper have been using RLDRAM II since 2007 (FCS of m120). And Cisco have started using RLDRAM in the ASR1000 packet processing engine. I'm not trying to understate how difficult this sort of thing is, btw. Packet forwarding engines are hard. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]