[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
- Subject: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
- From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola)
- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 09:24:12 +0200 (EET)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAACxBkw5QKESRLPlwbIdBE4HAQAAAAA=@iname.com> <[email protected]> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAAAEThYncSqKTaelGbK7oMrRAQAAAAA=@iname.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_IPv6_support_by_major_transit_providers
'Maximum Prefix Length' may be an over-simplifying metric. FWIW, we're
certainly not a major transit provider, but we do allow /48 in the
designated PI ranges but not in the PA ranges. So the question is not
necessarily just about the prefix length used because it might vary by
the prefix.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings