On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:23:20PM -0800, Rafael Rodriguez wrote:
> You can do the same with Junos (calling a 'generic' policy as a
> sub-routine).
You cannot pass parameters.
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: d...@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
You can do the same with Junos (calling a 'generic' policy as a sub-routine).
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 6, 2012, at 6:18, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:34:26AM +0100, Daniel Roesen
> wrote:
>> itself is completely AFI-agnostic - see e.g. IOS/IOS-XE [can
On 2/6/12 06:48 , Glen Kent wrote:
> One example that comes to my mind is that a few existing routers
> cant do line rate routing for IPv6 traffic as long as the netmask is
> < 65.
I'm sorry that's bs. It's trivial to partition a cam in order to do
/128s in a single lookup. that's actually the w
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:07:57PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a "native IPv6" router?
>
> Perhaps those which were designed with IPv4+IPv6 in mind from day 1,
> both in hardware and software
In a message written on Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:34:26AM +0100, Daniel Roesen
wrote:
> itself is completely AFI-agnostic - see e.g. IOS/IOS-XE [can't comment
> on XR]).
IOS-XR is fully AFI-agnostic, as far as I can tell. It also updated
the CLI to be consistently "ipv4 ..." or "ipv6 ..." with sim
> >> With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
> >> IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
> >> optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
> >
> > OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a "native IPv6" router? Is
> this
> > another concept as s
>> With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
>> IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
>> optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
>
> OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a "native IPv6" router? Is this
> another concept as silly as "hardw
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:07:57PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> OK, I'll bite. What would qualify as a "native IPv6" router?
Perhaps those which were designed with IPv4+IPv6 in mind from day 1,
both in hardware and software - like Juniper/JUNOS. In contrast to other
the gear where IPv6
Glen Kent wrote:
> With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
> IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a more
> optimal IPv6 router, than what exists today?
It depends on what you want routers to do.
As I am working on Tbps photonic routers with fiber
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:50:54 +0530, Glen Kent said:
> Most routers today are basically IPv4 routers, with IPv6 thrown in.
Not sure if this statement is troll bait or flame bate. Probably both. ;)
I see Joel has already confirmed my memory that vendors had ASICs
doing IPv6 forwarding last century.
On 2/5/12 17:20 , Glen Kent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Most routers today are basically IPv4 routers, with IPv6 thrown in.
> They are however designed keeping IPv4 in mind.
>
> With IPv6 growing, if we were to design a native IPv6 router, with
> IPv4 functionality thrown in, then is it possible to design a
11 matches
Mail list logo
