[142762] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Benson Schliesser)
Tue Jul 12 19:56:05 2011
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAPWAtb+mMZDtwEjSjmZDHOgFkjCpijxo_CoGHU2=pkOYe=0X1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:57:04 -0500
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jul 11, 2011, at 7:19 PM, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
> Again, this is only hard to understand (or accept) if you don't know
> how your routers work.
> * why do you think there is an ARP and ND table?
> * why do you think there are policers to protect the CPU from
> excessive ARP/ND punts or traffic?
> * do you even know the limit of your boxes' ARP / ND tables? Do you
> realize that limit is a tiny fraction of one /64?
> * do you understand what happens when your ARP/ND policers are =
reached?
> * did you think about the impact on neighboring routers and protocol
> next-hops, not just servers?
> * did you every try to deploy a /16 on a flat LAN with a lot of hosts
> and see what happens? Doesn't work too well. A v6 /64 is 281
> trillion times bigger than a v4 /16. There's no big leap of logic
> here as to why one rogue machine could break your LAN.
FYI, in case you're interested in these topics, the IETF working group =
ARMD was chartered to explore address resolution scale. I'm one of the =
co-chairs. It's in the Operations Area, and we'd love to have more =
operators involved - if you're willing to contribute, your input will =
help set the direction. (If operators don't contribute, it will be just =
another vendor-led circle... well, you know the score.)
For details please see http://tools.ietf.org/wg/armd/charters.
Cheers,
-Benson
