nanog mailing list archives
Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes?
From: Loránd Jakab <ljakab () ac upc edu>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 19:31:43 +0100
On 12/08/2010 11:08 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 8 dec 2010, at 20:10, Mohacsi Janos wrote:Do you think adopting LISP or similar architectures to reduce the problems mentioned above?
[...]
Do you lose initial packets when there is no mapping state yet?
Yes. But there are proposals to minimize the chances of that occurring, by pro-actively refreshing mappings in the local cache before their TTL expires, and warming up the cache with all entries of an upstream resolver (with a bulk cache transfer) at router boot time. -Lorand Jakab
Current thread:
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes?, (continued)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Jack Bates (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Kevin Oberman (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Owen DeLong (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Jack Bates (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Owen DeLong (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? James Hess (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Owen DeLong (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Jack Bates (Dec 09)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Loránd Jakab (Dec 09)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? David Conrad (Dec 08)
- Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Jeff Wheeler (Dec 08)
- RE: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? George Bonser (Dec 08)
- Re: Start accepting longer prefixes as IPv4 depletes? Luigi Iannone (Dec 10)