nanog mailing list archives
Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?
From: sthaug () nethelp no
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 15:50:45 +0100 (CET)
Can you please name names for the "somewhat less efficient" part? I've seen this and similar claims several times, but the lack of specific information is rather astounding.Well, I do know if you look at the specs for most newer L3 switches, they will often say something like "max IPv4 routes 8192, max IPv6 routes 4096". This leads one to believe that the TCAMs/hash tables are only using 64 bits for IPv6 forwarding, and therefores longer prefixes must be handled in software.
It might lead you to believe so - however, I believe this would be commercial suicide for hardware forwarding boxes because they would no longer be able to handle IPv6 at line rate for prefixes needing more than 64 bit lookups. It would also be an easy way to DoS such boxes...
This may very well not be true "under the hood" at all, but the fact that vendors publish so little IPv6 specification and benchmarking information doesn't help matters.
Cisco actually has published quite a bit of info, e.g. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/product_data_sheet09186a0080159856_ps4835_Products_Data_Sheet.html "Delivering scalable forwarding Performance: up to 400 Mpps IPv4 and 200 Mpps IPv6 with dCEF" They have also published EANTC tests which include IPv6 forwarding rates. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug () nethelp no
Current thread:
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6?, (continued)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 25)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 25)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 24)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Alexandru Petrescu (Dec 29)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ryan Malayter (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? sthaug (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Alexandru Petrescu (Dec 29)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Leo Bicknell (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Glen Kent (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Jeff Wheeler (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Jeff Wheeler (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ray Soucy (Dec 28)
- Re: subnet prefix length > 64 breaks IPv6? Ryan Malayter (Dec 28)