[j-nsp] M120/T320/T640 pitfalls with IPv6?

[Kevin Oberman]

> Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 14:07:50 -0700
> From: Chris Cappuccio <chris at nmedia.net>
> Sender: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> 
> Our Juniper sales rep (3rd party reseller, not Juniper direct) is
> telling us that IPv6 "features" are in software on these older
> platforms, and that if you want full speed on IPv6, you need to move
> to the MX platform.
> 
> Is this true?
> 
> What do I lose by running IPv6 on a M120, an M20, or a T320/T640 ?
> Does the swithcing board CPU really handle intensive features in
> software or is this a "buy more hardware" request by the sales folks?
> Or a little of both?

The short answer is all Juniper routers do IPv6 forwarding in hardware.
Well, excluding those that don't do hardware forwarding on IPv4, either.

The only real issues with older boxes, esp. the M20, is that they may
run short on memory. Both the IPv6 RIBs and FIB are four times the size
per entry as IPv4 entries. With about 5000 IPv6 routes in the DFZ, it's
probably not an issue, but the IPv6 DFZ is growing quickly. 

As long as the router does not carry too many routes, it's not an
issue. We have run a Juniper backbone with M120, T-series, as well as MX
boxes running IPv6 in production for several years with no issues at
all. 

That said, there are some things that are not equal between protocols,
but performance is not one of them and the MX is no better then the
others in that regard.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman at es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Last work day before retirement is Jun 17, 2011