[100530] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "ARPANet Co-Founder Predicts An Internet Crisis" (slashdot)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rubens Kuhl Jr.)
Thu Oct 25 17:32:31 2007
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:29:54 -0200
From: "Rubens Kuhl Jr." <rubensk@gmail.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <924f29280710251402h2d86f682ycf3bb95acbd6598a@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
When we start migrating to IPv6, wouldn't state-aware forwarding be
required for a good part of the traffic that is being translated from
customer IPv6 to a legacy IPv4 ?
I'm a personal fan of topology-based forwarding, but this is limited
to the address space of the topology we currently use, which is
running out of space in a few years (few meaning whatever version of
the IPv4 RIRs deadline you believe in).
Rubens
On 10/25/07, Jason Frisvold <xenophage0@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/07, Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com> wrote:
> > an economic crisis. Of course, Roberts has an agenda. He's now CEO of Anagran
> > Inc., which makes a technology called flow-based routing that, Roberts claims,
> > will solve all of the world's routing problems in one go."
>
> Anyone have any experience with these Anagran flow routers? Are they
> that much of a departure from traditional routing that it makes a big
> difference? I haven't done a lot of research into flow-based routing
> at this point, but it sounds like this would be similar to the MPLS
> approach, no?
>
> How about cost per port versus traditional routers from Cisco or
> Juniper? It seems that he cites cost as the main point of contention,
> so are these Anagran routers truly less expensive?
>
> --
> Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
> XenoPhage0@gmail.com
> http://blog.godshell.com
>
