[168304] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Experiences with IPv6 and Routing Efficiency
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sat Jan 18 12:53:06 2014
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 19:51:10 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAHDzDLDSGcq1PNxVMn06UQ66FZfcSbod+_J+RaReXKCQ14qGJA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Reply-To: mark.tinka@seacom.mu
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--nextPart1507345.BcyNNb18UK
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Saturday, January 18, 2014 06:07:59 PM Mukom Akong T.=20
wrote:
> Would a routing device process (while forwarding for
> example) more IPv6 packets than IPv4?
It could (as a function of raw traffic).
What's the concern, unless we misunderstand?
Mark.
--nextPart1507345.BcyNNb18UK
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)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=0U5Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1507345.BcyNNb18UK--
