4 ms·
Is that mixing up two different classes of devices? Home embedded routers run into problems due to the overhead of state tracking and buffers for all the simul
by harshreality 11y ago
Is that mixing up two different classes of devices?
Home embedded routers run into problems due to the overhead of state tracking and buffers for all the simultaneous connections. If they support 10k simultaneous connections, and they track 2x ip addresses for each, the additional overhead of 2x 12 bytes per ipv6 connection is 240kB memory. Buffers are going to be much, much more than that, and buffer requirements are about the same for ipv4 and ipv6.
Routers that have full BGP routing tables tend to be serious routers with TCAM. That's expensive and that does put pressure on BGP routing table sizes, to accommodate older and cheaper [real] routers. However, ignoring ipv6 is simply not an option, so there's no point in dreaming about how staying with ipv4 forever would allow quadruple the routing table capacity for a set amount of TCAM.
- exelius 11y agoI was actually referring more to the core routers with TCAM than home routers. And I agree, ignoring IPv6 isn't an option, but it is a viable option to encourage workarounds. Which is exactly what's happened; so most ISPs that support IPv6 do 6to4 tunneling at the edge.
- harshreality 11y agoThat's a workaround? Interior routers within the ISP don't need to hold the global routing table, so there's no real TCAM pressure on them, right?
- wtallis 11y agoAs you venture down into the realm of cheap consumer routers, you run out of ROM to hold the code implementing IPv6 long before you run out of RAM.