[151324] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Masataka Ohta)
Thu Mar 15 20:07:34 2012
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:05:41 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CADVasu7g61FeQX3zpD_eORiNyUmM5st34r2qknauo9L9DL_AjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
james machado wrote:
>> 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.
> I found this bit of research from 2007 (
> http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~wlu/papers/tcam.pdf ). It seems to me there
> are probably more ways to mix and match different types of ram to be
> able to deal with this beast.
But it's not fixed time.
Worse, it synthesis IPv6 table from the current IPv4 ones, which
means the number of routing table entries is a lot less than 1M.
Masataka Ohta
