[address-policy-wg] Policies interact
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policies interact
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policies interact
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Oliver Bartels
oliver at bartels.de
Thu Apr 7 18:59:56 CEST 2005
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:10:55 -1000, Randy Bush wrote: >nope. folk are using /126s internally, and have igp or ibgp carrying >those prefixes. of course, they also have the classic loopbacks for >bgp, which can be /128s. real hardware vendors know this and don't >make the same mistakes as were made in the old a/b/c days. TCAM IC's typically process 72 address lines per cycle, which means 64 bit for the address plus 8 bit policy etc. Even if the hardware permits it, I don't think it is a good idea to put /65 and more specific prefixes into the IGP. This has nothing to do with a/b/c mistakes, you would just throw away a possible optimization path for no additional gain at all. There is a good chance some day (in the next 50 years) these additional 8 bytes will have a better use than the current "we already know where you are" adresses. Best Regards Oliver Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policies interact
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policies interact
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]