nanog mailing list archives
Re: virtual aggregation in IETF
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:39:37 -0700
Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008, Joel Jaeggli wrote:Software switched routers have little pressure on fib limitions. For a certain class of application the software switched edge router is in a much better position to accommodate fib growth than a device with a fixed sized cam.I dunno about that; there's some papers floating about which look at trie type FIB representations which note significant savings in compressing FIB to unique entry set. Less memory, less comparsions, less nodes, etc. Rather interesting stuff.
Not saying that they couldn't benefit from it, however on one hand we have a device with a 36Mbit cam on the other, one with 2GB of ram, which one fills up first?
Try http://www.academypublisher.com/jnw/vol02/no03/jnw02031827.pdf for fun. Adrian
Current thread:
- virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Alain Durand (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 21)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Robert E. Seastrom (Jul 21)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Alain Durand (Jul 20)