|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: IPv6
> > Vendor C's issues with v6 are a problem, but they're > > not the only provider of core or edge gear... > > Also, even though their forwarding mechanisa are not > > completely functional, they do pass packets, so it'll > > work, just not be optimized. > > When a 30Mpps IPv4 box falls back to <200kpps for IPv6, I don't think "not > completely functional" is an adequate description. To me, that falls into > the "not supported" category. Clearly, you wouldn't deploy this box for a native-IPV6 app. I am guessing Cisco is betting this box will have an upgrade available or be obsolete by the time the majority of their customers want to pass 30Mpps IPV6. Heck, a PC-IPV6 router will move more than 200Kpps, but I don't want to get on that horse. Deepak Jain AiNET
|