With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a native IPv6 router? Is this
another concept as silly as hardware vs
With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a native IPv6 router? Is
this
another concept as silly as hardware
In a message written on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:34:26AM +0100, Daniel Roesen
wrote:
itself is completely AFI-agnostic - see e.g. IOS/IOS-XE [can't comment
on XR]).
IOS-XR is fully AFI-agnostic, as far as I can tell. It also updated
the CLI to be consistently ipv4 ... or ipv6 ... with similar
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Daniel Roesen d...@cluenet.de wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:07:57PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a native IPv6 router?
Perhaps those which were designed with IPv4+IPv6 in mind from day 1,
both in hardware and
On 2/6/12 06:48 , Glen Kent wrote:
One example that comes to my mind is that a few existing routers
cant do line rate routing for IPv6 traffic as long as the netmask is
65.
I'm sorry that's bs. It's trivial to partition a cam in order to do
/128s in a single lookup. that's actually the
You can do the same with Junos (calling a 'generic' policy as a sub-routine).
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 6, 2012, at 6:18, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
In a message written on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:34:26AM +0100, Daniel Roesen
wrote:
itself is completely AFI-agnostic - see e.g.
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:23:20PM -0800, Rafael Rodriguez wrote:
You can do the same with Junos (calling a 'generic' policy as a
sub-routine).
You cannot pass parameters.
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: d...@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
Hi,
Most routers today are basically IPv4 routers, with IPv6 thrown in.
They are however designed keeping IPv4 in mind.
With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
Asic based forwarding engines with ipv6 support are more than a decade
old at this point.
If one looks at an asr9000 or an MX or T that looks like an ipv6 router
to me.
Glen
.
With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a native IPv6 router? Is this
another concept as silly as hardware vs
Glen Kent wrote:
With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
It depends on what you want routers to do.
As I am working on Tbps photonic routers with fiber
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:07:57PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a native IPv6 router?
Perhaps those which were designed with IPv4+IPv6 in mind from day 1,
both in hardware and software - like Juniper/JUNOS. In contrast to other
the gear where IPv6
12 matches
Mail list logo
