[99901] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How Not to Multihome
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Mon Oct 8 19:03:54 2007
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:49:53 -0700
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Keegan.Holley@sungard.com
CC: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, nanog <nanog@merit.edu>, owner-nanog@merit.edu,
"Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
In-Reply-To: <OF25497DB0.F7715C12-ON8525736E.007AB624-8525736E.007B2F87@sungard.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Keegan.Holley@sungard.com wrote:
>
> I'm really interested to see what happens when we start filling those
> same routers with ipv6 routes.
All 970 of them?
joelja
>
>
> *Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>*
> Sent by: owner-nanog@merit.edu
>
> 10/08/2007 06:10 PM
>
>
> To
> "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
> cc
> nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
> Subject
> Re: How Not to Multihome
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> It's not 'law' per se, but having the customer originate their own
>> announcements is definitely the Right Way to go.
>
> it is interesting, and worrysome, to consider this in light of likely
> growth in the routing table (ref ipv4 free pool run out discussion) and
> vendors' inability to handle large ribs and fibs on enterprise class
> routers.
>
> randy
>
>
>
