Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!qbranch.rutgers.edu!rapatel From: rapatel@qbranch.rutgers.edu (Rocky) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk Subject: Re: Routing table size for FP. Message-ID: Date: 6 Jun 89 05:36:12 GMT References: <12499810434.36.OP.BOWMAN@SCIENCE.UTAH.EDU> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 19 By the way, you will still have a limit of being able to only configure about 64 routes via atalkatab even if you use our gateway code. Atalkad is set up to send it all in one packet, which is limited to the max size of a lap packet - somewhere around 600 bytes or so. Also, when transfering the routing table between kboxes, the same limits exist. That is another reason I want to switch to using Ethertalk routing instead of KIP routing. If we replaced our KFPS-2s with KFPS-4s and gatorboxes, inidividually configure them without using atalkad, and use Cisco's Ethertalk routing, we avoid any limitations of KIP. Providing that 1) the Gatorbox like the K* uses dynamically allocated tables, that 2) they can operate on the same networks, and that 3) it all works correctly, I believe it might be possible to avoid any real limitations other than memory on the Gatorbox, KFPS-4, and Ciscos. Of course this is purely theoretical... Rakesh Patel.