[142029] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Thu Jun 16 19:25:00 2011
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <14504.1308158517@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:23:38 -0700
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jun 15, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:04:44 +0200, sthaug@nethelp.no said:
>=20
>> How big is huge? To some degree it depends on how broadcast "chatty"
>> the protocols used are - but there's also the matter of having a
>> size which makes it possible to troubleshoot. Personally I'd prefer
>> an upper limit of a few hundred computers.
>=20
> And whatever you do, don't be like one med school and build a flat net
> so big that spanning tree won't converge. ;)
by the time you throw trill and vpls into the mix it may be a common or =
pseudo-common broadcast domain but it's not flat.=
