|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: 206.82.160.0/22
Date Sent: 24-SEP-1995 18:03:39 Noel wrote: > ><Let's see, this argument has now been had on CIDRD, Big-Internet, Com-Priv, >and now it seems to have struck NANOG. Anyone care to guess how many more >mailing lists we can have the same debate one? This is really tedious, stupid, >and wasteful, everyone.> ... >(although 2^18 is still probably too big). The limit might have to move up >if we fill the routing tables with /18's... Let's say we did have an absolute limit of /18s and 2^18 entries. 2^18 entries of 32 bytes each is 16Mb, which is almost within the capacity of a Cisco 2500. (Well, Ok, CISCO would do something clever about not storing the complete net and mask given that it would never be more than /18 for external networks.) Why is this a problem? Ehud -- Ehud Gavron (EG76) [email protected]
|