nanog mailing list archives
Re: Stupid Ipv6 question...
From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman () es net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:27:57 -0800
From: Joe Abley <jabley () isc org> Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:55:10 -0500 On 20 Nov 2004, at 19:13, Kevin Oberman wrote:In any case, if the prefix length is >64, routing is done in the CPU.Engineers at Juniper seem to be telling me that this is definitively not the case for their M- and T-series routers. Which routers were you referring to?
Odd. Juniper engineers have assured me that this is th case with M and T series routers (or any router using the IP2 chip). To clarify a bit, if the networks are connected, or "direct" in Juniper-ese. then the CPU is not involved. Only if there is a real "routing decision" made. OS if you have several connected /126s or /127s on a single router, you are OK, but if you are truly sub-netting a prefix longer than a /64 to several routers, then the CPU gets to figure out where a packet goes. I'd love to hear this is wrong, but it was confirmed to m by a rather senor engineer at Juniper, not a JTAC phone droid. Would Tony care to comment? -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman () es net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Current thread:
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question..., (continued)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... Kevin Loch (Nov 19)
- RE: Stupid Ipv6 question... Scott Morris (Nov 19)
- Re: [nanog] RE: Stupid Ipv6 question... Dan Mahoney, System Admin (Nov 19)
- RE: [nanog] RE: Stupid Ipv6 question... Scott Morris (Nov 19)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... James (Nov 19)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... Crist Clark (Nov 19)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... Kevin Oberman (Nov 20)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 bmanning (Nov 20)
- RE: Stupid Ipv6 Scott Morris (Nov 20)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... Joe Abley (Nov 21)
- Re: Stupid Ipv6 question... Kevin Oberman (Nov 22)