[address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mikael Abrahamsson
swmike at swm.pp.se
Fri Sep 30 10:33:23 CEST 2011
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Turchanyi Geza wrote: > So the hardwired limit of 0.5M IPv4 routes and 0.25k IPv6 does not allow > a few hundred thousands more IPv6 routes at all (not even would allow an > 0.25M IPv6 limit) -- and speed of processing is an other issue... Huh? Hardwired? It's not fixed, it is either configurable or dynamic, depending on platform. > In summary: we do not have the technology which would allow a very liberal > PI allocation policy, therefore a very liberal PI allocation policy is not > possible now. Yes. Current level of proposed "strictness" is ok for me right now, but I definitely believe it needs to be monitored closely. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike at swm.pp.se
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]