mailing list archives
Re: Optimal IPv6 router
From: Glen Kent <glen.kent () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 20:18:29 +0530
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Daniel Roesen <dr () cluenet de> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:07:57PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a "native IPv6" router?
Perhaps those which were designed with IPv4+IPv6 in mind from day 1,
both in hardware and software - like Juniper/JUNOS. In contrast to other
Not just that.
I had meant that the HW is optimized for IPv6 and also as a side
effect does IPv4. This router could be designed assuming that you'll
have more IPv6 traffic to forward than IPv4.
the gear where IPv6 was always an aftermath, which shows in both
hardware (limits of performance, functionality and scaling) as well as
software (every feature gets implemented twice, even if the feature
itself is completely AFI-agnostic - see e.g. IOS/IOS-XE [can't comment
Yes, thats what i had in mind.
One example that comes to my mind is that a few existing routers cant
do line rate routing for IPv6 traffic as long as the netmask is < 65.
Also routers have a limited TCAM size for storing routes with masks >
64. These routers were primarily designed for IPv4 and also support
I was wondering what we could optimize on if we only design an IPv6
router (assume an extreme case where it does not even support IPv4).
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr () cluenet de -- dr () IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
Re: Optimal IPv6 router Rubens Kuhl (Feb 06)
Re: Optimal IPv6 router Masataka Ohta (Feb 06)