[67260] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Are SW upgrades needed in MPLS core networks?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard A Steenbergen)
Fri Feb 6 14:49:43 2004
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:47:03 -0500
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>
To: "Rubens Kuhl Jr." <rubens@email.com>
Cc: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <080201c3ece8$07d82740$020ba8c0@NOTEBOOK>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 05:32:57PM -0200, Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
>
> > Doing 8+1+1+1+1+... would seem wasteful for IPv6 with the current
> > address allocation scheme, are you sure thatīs whatīs used for IPv6 too?
>
> I'm not. Juniper isn't very open about this matter, and I only got
> confirmation of that for IPv4.
Hrm, I could have sworn it was actually 16-1-1-1-1-etc for the trie
lookup primitive on the IP2. But alas I am not an ASIC designer, nor do I
work for Juniper, nor am I in any way qualified to do anything other than
talk out my ass about the benefits and drawbacks of any specific bit
groupings in a multi-bit trie implementation in hardware. So unlike the
rest of the list, I will quit while I am ahead. :)
--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
