North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: protocols that don't meet the need...
> The current routing model doesn't scale. I don't want to sit 5 years from > now needing a router that'll handle 8 million routes to get me through the > next 5 years of route growth. You might want to read a NANOG posting made by Sean Doran back in September 1995 http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/historical/9509/msg00047.html People had scaling problems back then because routers were less powerful. They solved those scaling problems without rushing to the vendors, checkbook in hand. You might want to review some of the other discussion on NANOG during that month, September 1995, to see what people were saying about topological addressing. > PI space for multihoming and AS number growth is a bad thing for scaling > and economics, however you look at it. I disagree. I think the Internet can scale the current routing model to 8 million routes using proxy aggregation, filtering and geo-topological allocation of IPv6 addresses to multihomers. > Shim6 would hopefully curb the prefix growth very early in the growth > curve as single entities won't need AS to multihome between two different > ISPs. Who wants to use a technology that will not let them get to Yahoo and other major websites? Shim6 is dead. We either change the routing architecture entirely or we find better ways to aggregate and filter so that the global routing table only has routes that need to be visible everywhere to everyone. Talk to Owen Delong if you think we need to change the whole architecture. In any case, creative thinking is what is needed. Not scary linear extrapolations. --Michael Dillon