[141918] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Tue Jun 14 10:02:17 2011
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106141017430.26305@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:01:25 +0200
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 14 jun 2011, at 10:20, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On the AMSIX peering LAN there is more than 100pps of ND traffic (at =
least there was when we checked). Since they do not do IPv6 multicast =
intelligent handling (MLD snooping I guess) certain highend (legacy) =
router platforms run into trouble because all these packets are punted =
to RP.
That is really pathetic. I thought that any Ethernet chip built the =
previous decade could filter 64 or so multicast addresses in hardware. =
Only when you're subscribed to more multicast groups than what your =
Ethernet chip can filter in hardware does the software for an IPv4-only =
system have to encounter IPv6 multicasts, or an IPv6 system random =
neighbor solicitations, which are load balanced over a wide range of =
multicast addresses just for this reason.
Also strange that there would be this much neighbor discovery traffic, =
probably the same reason AMS-IX used to have 15 kbps of ARP traffic: =
stale BGP peerings to addresses that no longer exist.=
