On 6/3/13 3:59 PM, Andrew McGregor wrote:
That's completely true; many switch chips cannot route on longer than /64 prefixes, so attempting to do so starts to either heat up the software slow path, or consume ACL entries, or is simply not supported at all. While this is arguably a bug, it is also pretty much ubiquitous in the current generation of ethernet switches, which are the basis for the majority of routers.
please cite specifics. I have no devices in the field that have such a limitation.

joel


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 6:27 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    On 04/06/2013 03:44, manning bill wrote:
    > On 2June2013Sunday, at 16:47, Sander Steffann wrote:
    >
    >> On 03/06/2013 11:06, manning bill wrote:
    >>> /48's are a horrible policy - one should only advertise what
    one is actually using.
    >> Now *that* would cause a nice fragmented DFZ...
    >> Sander
    >>
    >
    >
    > I'm going to inject a route. One route. why do you care if its a
    /9, a /28, a /47, or a /121?

    I've heard tell that there are routers that are designed to handle
    prefixes up to /64 efficiently but have a much harder time with
    prefixes longer than that, as a reasonable engineering trade-off.
    Not being a router designer, I don't know how true this is.

    Brian

    Its -one- route.
    > That one route covers everything I'm going to useā€¦ and nothing
    I'm not.
    >
    > Is there a credible reason you want to be the vector of DDoS
    attacks, by announcing dark space (by proxy aggregation)?
    > Is that an operational liability you are willing to assume, just
    so you can have "unfragmented" DFZ space?
    >
    >
    > /bill

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
    ipv6@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
    Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
    --------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to