Alex Conta wrote:
>
> Thomas Narten wrote:
> >
> > [...] When someone can make a compelling argument for why
> > the bits need to be defined in a certain way (i.e., there is a real
> > application for which using the bits provides significant benefits,
> > and those benefits do not appear achievable through other means) that
> > is the time to define the bits. What I do sense with many of the
> > recent discussions surrounding the Flow Label is that there are many
> > folks (i.e., folks putting IPv6 into hardware) that want to know what
> > they should implement w.r.t. the Flow Label. While it would be nice to
> > be able tell them what to do, we shouldn't standardize something just
> > for the sake of having a definition.
> >
> > Thomas
>
> 10Gb/sec time wise means 100 psec/bit, or 0.8 nsec per byte,
> or 3.2
> instructions of a hypothetical
> 1Ghz processor which can execute one instruction per cycle.
""or 3.2 instructions""
meant to be:
""or 3.2 instructions per 4 byte longword""
Sorry.
> That's a
> hell of a requirement.
>
> As consumers, we all enjoy the very cost-effective availability of
> 100Mb/sec line speed packet processing in almost every Notebook, or PC.
>
> IP and QoS Engines implemented in silicon, on a chip or a few chips, by
> IBM, INTEL, and many, many others, is one of the reasons of the low
> costs, along with the ability to optimizing the hardware
> in so many more and different ways than the software (for instance
> parallel header, or parallel header field processing).
>
> 1Gb/sec IPv4 packet forwarding is a reality, 10Gb/sec is just around the
> corner, with 40Gb/sec following not long after.
>
> With such drastic "timing" requirements, implementing engines in
> silicon, and inventing *clever* mechanisms to handle the sequential
> processing of headers alone, will not be sufficient to implement very
> cost-effective IPv6 forwarding and QoS solutions, and IPv6 is at a
> disadvantage relative to IPv4.
>
> We need all the help we can get from the protocol, that is headers, and
> their fields, for forwarding and QoS processing, and by that I mean both
> Intserv, and Diffserv.
>
> Regards,
> Alex
>
>
>
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
