[151295] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eugen Leitl)
Thu Mar 15 06:55:09 2012
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 11:54:15 +0100
From: Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <4F616D7C.7030307@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:18:04PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> As long as we keep using IPv4, we are mostly stopping at /24 and
> must stop at /32.
>
> But, see the subject. It's well above moore.
>
> For high speed (fixed time) routed look up with 1M entries, SRAM is
> cheap at /24 and is fine at /32 but expensive and power consuming
> TCAM is required at /48.
>
> That's one reason why we should stay away from IPv6.
What prevents you from using
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v1/n6/full/ncomms1063.html
with IPv6?
