[86221] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Scalability issues in the Internet routing system
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Elmar K. Bins)
Thu Oct 27 03:56:48 2005
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:56:21 +0200
From: "Elmar K. Bins" <elmi@4ever.de>
To: sthaug@nethelp.no
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: "Elmar K. Bins" <elmi@4ever.de>, sthaug@nethelp.no,
nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20051027.074808.74672758.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
sthaug@nethelp.no (sthaug@nethelp.no) wrote:
> I'd have to say that RFC 3513 is out of touch with reality here, yes.
> As far as I know current routers with hardware based forwarding look
> at the full 128 bits - certainly our Juniper routers do.
Ours do as well, but essentially, that's because they are internal to
our network. Nobody would need that in the shared DFZ part, there I
agree with Rubens.
So although you would need the longer prefixes (right up to /128) in
your routing core, you would not necessarily have to have them in
your edge routers (as long as they don't directly connect to your
core, like Cisco keeps telling us we should do).
Dunno whether that's a feasible approach, probably not (big transit
providers essentially pushing transit through the core), but if
possible, it would lighten the routing burden a lot.
Yours,
Elmar.
--
"Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren."
(PLemken, <bu6o7e$e6v0p$2@ID-31.news.uni-berlin.de>)
--------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
