IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Wed, 28 May 2014 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B173A1A0972 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:48:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 vuh9eMXON1qY for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (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 A276F1A0383 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from vpn-254.int.inex.ie (vpn-254.int.inex.ie [193.242.111.254]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.14.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s4SCmaUu044722 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 May 2014 13:48:37 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
Message-ID: <5385DB24.8070107@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 13:48:36 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6B9A@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m261ks7xww.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840070.90801@gmail.com> <m2y4xn7wep.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840723.8010606@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1O_poMR200sjU=ttRvGaeQRkC1ZfXC0Ok4uQxdq3K=NQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2mwe37tbn.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAKD1Yr2t3-vxuG=iDi4biBNFpJwuzuHgfpB74i_uydWWRV7qZg@mail.gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6E02@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m2fvjv7q4h.wl%randy@psg.com> <m1WpDcc-0000BMC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <43BB867C-7BCA-45F6-8ADC-A49B34D6C0DC@nominum.com> <m1WpHrp-0000BQC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <9DB71B37-999E-4F7F-A7DA-6B243574E818@nominum.com> <2E2EC822-60EB-4B09-8BB3-D8FB098EB181@delong.com> <CD77B261-5F6F-4177-AA50-0B2DD3D15260@nominum.com> <B95BEA59-B1A2-4CEF-ACF4-63F65FB544AA@delong.com> <4FF6E348-6BB5-473A-8E94-4A3EE8BD32DC@nominum.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405280707260.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se> <0ED911FA-D24C-4FC8-9D6A-F38F9711F115@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <0ED911FA-D24C-4FC8-9D6A-F38F9711F115@steffann.nl>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Q-cJz_HXIhoBoA6XWPvQ1GYFG0s
Cc: v6ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:48:44 -0000

On 28/05/2014 13:38, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Either that, or coming up with a routing protocol that can handle the number of prefixes..

it's not the routing protocol that matters but the FIB capacity on the
routers.  Churn and RIB size are not causing problems.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email