IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-why64-01.txt]

Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no> Thu, 06 March 2014 06:34 UTC

Return-Path: <tore@fud.no>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DCF31A00ED for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 22:34:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham
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 e6X0W8uzZPLV for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 22:34:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from greed.fud.no (greed.fud.no [IPv6:2a02:c0:1001:100::145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA671A00E4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 22:34:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [2a02:c0:2:4:6666:17:0:1000] (port=60611 helo=echo.linpro.no) by greed.fud.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tore@fud.no>) id 1WLRsZ-000724-3u; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 07:34:03 +0100
Message-ID: <531816D9.4050200@fud.no>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 07:34:01 +0100
From: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-why64-01.txt]
References: <52F2DC55.5070200@gmail.com> <CAFU7BATyuEoK_TEqAXqz2ONvuO9P0y45SpJ-q7DHsmF4pBaezg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BATyuEoK_TEqAXqz2ONvuO9P0y45SpJ-q7DHsmF4pBaezg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/yurZ2QbhI3H5i-MFTWUTsSJJhQI
Cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 06:34:11 -0000

* Jen Linkova

> I have a comment on section 5.2 which says
> 
> 'There have been unconfirmed assertions that some routers have a
>    performance drop-off for prefixes longer than /64, due to design
>    issues.'
> 
> I can confirm that there *are* network devices which have issues with
> prefixes longer than /64 (such as, for example, seriously limiting
> number of such prefixes being installed in FIB etc).

Your statement looks very much like an unconfirmed assertion to me...

Could you be more specific? Which vendors, products, software versions,
have what kind of issue(s) specifically with prefixes >/64, exactly?

Tore

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email