nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
From: Matt Harris <matt () netfire net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:22:10 -0500
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Scott Weeks <surfer () mauigateway com> wrote:
Hmm... Faster and better? The links seem to be an IPv6 cheerleader write up. I looked at the URLs and the URLs one pointed to and pulled out everything related to IPv6 being faster/better.
Is it possible that simply having a much smaller routing table overall in terms of sheer number of prefixes in the DFZ has a positive performance impact on passing packets, which coupled with the fact that implementations may be routed better/more efficiently due to a lack of "legacy cruft" creates a better experience for many packets? Just a theory/hypothesis with no data to back it up.
Current thread:
- IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Scott Weeks (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Matt Harris (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Rubens Kuhl (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Ca By (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Ca By (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Seth Mattinen (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jeremy Austin (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Matt Harris (Jun 11)