I see no reason for it to be able to do so, in fact I would expect it to be optimized for the exact opposite - a routing table with less than a hundred routes.
Stuffing a DFZ table into a Windows box is… not something you do. Neither Microsoft nor Windows admins would really even consider it a viable idea.
The real question is: how does it fail? In the best case, it just drops a little bit of networking performance due to lookups taking a tiny amount of time on each packet. In the worst case, not only do the lookups take forever, but it might also cause overall lockups and "hard" degradation due to cascade effects from the network stack spinning to its death on each single packet.
But considering Windows servers are used as VPN endpoints, and those need to support at least some 4-digit route table sizes, it can't be entirely bad. My expectation would be just mediocre network performance without huge overall disruption.
tptacek|3 years ago
eqvinox|3 years ago
Stuffing a DFZ table into a Windows box is… not something you do. Neither Microsoft nor Windows admins would really even consider it a viable idea.
The real question is: how does it fail? In the best case, it just drops a little bit of networking performance due to lookups taking a tiny amount of time on each packet. In the worst case, not only do the lookups take forever, but it might also cause overall lockups and "hard" degradation due to cascade effects from the network stack spinning to its death on each single packet.
But considering Windows servers are used as VPN endpoints, and those need to support at least some 4-digit route table sizes, it can't be entirely bad. My expectation would be just mediocre network performance without huge overall disruption.