nanog mailing list archives
RE: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter)
From: "Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan () verisign com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:11:17 -0500
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 04:43:58PM -0600, sysadmin () citynetwireless net wrote:Really? Where are the limits of BGP? Can you show me any numbers? You'd be the first. I'm not aware of any protocol inherent scaling brickwalls like with other protocols where certain timingconstraintsplace limits (or thinking of L1 systems, you remember CSMA/CD?).Last time I checked, Ethernet is still CSMA/CD.Correct. And there you have minimum frame spacing requirements (IFG) and (e.g. with 10Base2 networks) minimum distance between stations attached to the bus to allow CSMA/CD work correctly.
Interframe gap has no dependancy on station vector. The dependancy for CSMA/CD was bits on the wire and the alogorithm backed off until it was free to transmit. Are you talking about something else? -M< -M<
Current thread:
- RE: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter) Hannigan, Martin (Dec 21)
- Re: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter) Daniel Roesen (Dec 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter) Hannigan, Martin (Dec 21)
- RE: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter) Hannigan, Martin (Dec 21)
- Re: Addressing versus Routing (Was: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter) Andrew Dul (Dec 22)