Re: What to improve? BCP-38/SAC-004 anyone?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/01/2016 06:04, Jared Mauch wrote:
...
> The reason we (as an operator) can’t use BCP-38 is the vendor hardware can’t do it at line-rate and the performance hit is too much to sustain.

That seems worth a bit more discussion. I'd always naively assumed that BCP38 was
scalable since all it appears to need is a prefix match, and routers are very
good at matching prefixes; it's just that they don't normally match the source
prefix. Could some router-vendor person comment on this?

There's another issue here, though. BCP-38 and uRPF are also a potential cause of
connectivity problems: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-multi-homed-host

   Brian





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]