Maybe not full routing dualstack but it will at least last longer than a MLX. So if you HAVE to buy a platform today why not buy one that last one or two more years ? for approx 20% more of the price.
// Andreas On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:40 AM, George B. <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Niels Bakker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > * [email protected] (George B.) [Wed 12 May 2010, 01:34 CEST]: > >> > >> And basically the reason is ... I currently show about 320,000 routes > >> from one upstream for v4. The MLX can handle 512,000 v4 routes in > >> hardware. That leaves room for about 48,000 ipv6 routes provided the > >> v4 routing table stops growing today but exactly the opposite is going > >> to happen. As what remaining v4 addresses are broken into smaller > >> pieces, the routing table is going to continue to grow with smaller > >> prefixes. > > > > Ample room for growth if you follow the previous poster's advice which > was > > to get an XMR if you want to future-proof your routing. > > > > > > -- Niels. > > Not exactly "ample". XMR has room for 1,000,000 routes in hardware. > That is room for 170,000 v6 routes on top of the current 320,000 v4 > routes. Those will blow up, too. I am guessing that the breaking > point will be somewhere around 400,000 v4 routes and 100,000 v6 > routes. The price difference between MLX and MXR blades is pretty > steep for no other benefit than more routes. First vendor to get to > market with a huge CAM resource is going to win, bigtime. I don't > believe any hardware currently built for the medium size market will > handle full routes dual-stacked once v6 is the norm. > > George > > _______________________________________________ > foundry-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp >
_______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
