IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: How do we handle 4 billion CRH-FIB entries ¿?

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Fri, 22 May 2020 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843463A0D6F; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Uda_POzVmyx8; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69FFA3A0B48; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 965CC49; Fri, 22 May 2020 22:58:37 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:in-reply-to:date:date:subject:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-type:message-id:from:from :received:received; s=mail; t=1590181115; bh=Y3OJJbETHH3t5cOjg3V fG3L2X2OaSjXMN0KcIfgNNDI=; b=h7SBtFknv8EhsdKpPBBtqwQrXK6aNQPZO6W lim/4nzvjgyEjVExVS5N+PnN8WrFraiA51nXVf/vKex9moB7I176dC1CwC+T+IWQ owObR70TDWeUB4vkvf7TmZbHiZe6H0FgYlf3lJ+xkPXfHo35j387Dz0+uYnpZHmu 8FRWmvo4=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id CESgHF521Le1; Fri, 22 May 2020 22:58:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:f17a:b652:9093:4d1f] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:f17a:b652:9093:4d1f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5BCEE3C; Fri, 22 May 2020 22:58:35 +0200 (CEST)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Message-Id: <921AF101-D2FF-4BA8-ACC5-192E20191C8F@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B25FB0AD-D353-4905-942A-5847691F8A62"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Subject: Re: How do we handle 4 billion CRH-FIB entries ¿?
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 22:58:33 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMG2EtWS7iS0iLGDXHSe8q=37BGtoRSW+YT3hj6FYD9_8w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, "draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr@ietf.org" <draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr@ietf.org>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
References: <MWHPR11MB13748B1068560BD2878C89CBC9B40@MWHPR11MB1374.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <DM6PR05MB63486A07EEBE3F043D600D2BAEB40@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMG2EtWS7iS0iLGDXHSe8q=37BGtoRSW+YT3hj6FYD9_8w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/OZ5zHYUhMS0Hw6SiieDQoz2JTRQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 20:58:53 -0000

Robert,

> So your analogy comparing CRH to SR-MPLS scaling is I am afraid a fake news.

Calling something fake news has all kinds of negative connotations. Can you please use more constructive wording?

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email