From owner-freebsd-current Fri Apr 30 8: 4:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from enst.enst.fr (enst.enst.fr [137.194.2.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A423414CD1 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 08:04:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from beyssac@enst.fr) Received: from bofh.enst.fr (bofh.enst.fr [137.194.32.191]) by enst.enst.fr (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA09420; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:04:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by bofh.enst.fr (Postfix, from userid 12426) id A87CED21B; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:04:23 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <19990430170423.C7295@enst.fr> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:04:23 +0200 From: Pierre Beyssac To: John Polstra Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Any action on PR 10570 ? getting closer to 65K :-( References: <19990430122651.A11742@enst.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: ; from John Polstra on Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 07:29:14AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 07:29:14AM -0700, John Polstra wrote: > It would be pretty hard to create 2^32 routes, given that IPv4 only > has 32-bit addresses. :-) And here comes... IPv6 :-) > Also, if you time it I suspect you'll find > that it would take a geological lifetime on a fast machine to add that > many routes. Some people crack 40-bit DES in no time nowadays, so who knows what to expect... > I think it makes more sense to increase the size of the reference > count as discussed, rather than adding checks that add more complexity > and overhead. I agree. Let's count on an "int" being extended to 64 bits within the next few decades :-) -- Pierre Beyssac pb@enst.fr To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message