[167222] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Naive IPv6 (was AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Wed Dec 4 16:30:22 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAH1iCirY+DPmeV9fjAUxcRQX3iz=Bonv4366Xhg6UAOa2McK-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:30:04 -0500
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Brian Dickson
<brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Brian Dickson
>> <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Except that we have a hard limit of 1M total, which after a few 100K
>> > from
>>
>> where does the 1M come from?
>
>
> FIB table sizes, usually dictated by TCAM size. Think deployed hardware,
> lots of it.
> (Most instances of TCAM share it for IPv4 + IPv6, with each slot on IPv6
> taking two slots of TCAM, IIRC. And a few other things also consume TCAM,
> maybe not as significantly.)
>
> (Newer boxes may handle more on some network's cores, but I don't believe it
> is ubiquitously the case across the DFZ.)
>
ok, that's fair... but in ~5yrs time we'll work ourslves out of the 1M
mark, right? to 5M or 10M? (or something more than 1M)
