[192909] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Forwarding issues related to MACs starting with a 4 or a 6 (Was:
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Fri Dec 2 11:10:46 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLab68PRajPof_G5BY0uAgfJxvXZJwBxHj0EKax_B4XmCGA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:08:56 -0500
To: Simon Lockhart <simon@slimey.org>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Simon Lockhart <simon@slimey.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri Dec 02, 2016 at 10:29:56AM -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>
>> 2^(8*9216) is quite a lot of different packets to test through the
>> forwarding
>> path... But, wait, that assumes every bit combination for 9216 byte
>> packets,
>> but the packet might be shorter than that... So multiply that by
>> (9216-64).
>>
>>
> but most/all forwarding asics (aside from perhaps extreme's?) only deal
> with the first N bits in the header (128 or so..) so... not quite as many
> right?
>
>
>
and REALLY they could have just started ~9 yrs ago: "Hey, maybe this 4/6
thing is really a problem? how about we add 2 other things to our testing
framework?"
instead of: "High Five! First to market!"
