4 ms·
According to this Stack Exchange post from last year a full IPv4 routing table requires on the order of a few hundred MBs of RAM. This is indeed a tiny fraction
by cranekam 4y ago
According to this Stack Exchange post from last year a full IPv4 routing table requires on the order of a few hundred MBs of RAM. This is indeed a tiny fraction of the cost of maintaining the global internet infrastructure.
https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/76562/how-much-ram-you-actually-need-to-keep-whole-global-bgp-routing-table https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/76562...
- bauruine 4y agoThe problem is that the routers that have to hold the routing table can only handle a limited number of routes. There is a good article from APNIC about the topic. https://blog.apnic.net/2021/03/03/what-will-happen-when-the-routing-table-hits-1024k/ https://blog.apnic.net/2021/03/03/what-will-happen-when-the-...
- pifm_guy 4y agoSaid routers could be redesigned... And besides, there is no need to keep the whole routing table in RAM. Instead all that's necessary is a single integer per route representing which port packets to each route needs to be sent down. So even for a large router with 64 ports, the whole routing table fits inside 1 megabyte.
- bauruine 4y agoSure they can create routers with more space for the routing table but you still have to replace all the old ones which isn't cheap. A single port of a router at an internet exchange can reach more than 1000 different routers. A router has to decide to which IP it should forward a packet not just the port.