> On Nov 20, 2021, at 00:41 , Masataka Ohta <mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> > wrote: > > Speed of router depends on degree of parallelism. > > So, for quick routing table lookup, if you provide 128bit TCAM > for IPv6 in addition to 32bit TCAM for IPv4, speed is mostly > same, though, for each entry, TCAM for IPv6 costs 4 times more > and consumes 4 times more power than that for IPv4. > > However, as global routing table size of IPv6 is a lot smaller > than that of IPv4, the number of the entries of TCAM for IPv6 > is a lot smaller than that for IPv4. But it is so primarily > because IPv6 is not very widely deployed. Uh, no. It is so because on average IPv4 is so fragmented that most providers of any size are advertising 8+ prefixes compared to a more realistic IPv6 average of 1-3. Owen
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as... Michael Thomas
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as... William Herrin
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as... Michael Thomas
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Levine
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Michael Thomas
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Levine
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Lee
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Saku Ytti
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying j k
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Måns Nilsson
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta
- multihoming Dave Taht
- Re: multihoming Masataka Ohta
- Re: multihoming Baldur Norddahl