|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical routing meltdown - let's talk at Pittsburgh
Sean,
Could you please sign up to lead a discussion of the impending routing
meltdown as you see it at the upcoming NANOG meeting. You've been
very vocal on CIDRD, but it is not clear what solutions you are
offering.
I sincerely would like to know what you feel the problem is (though I
have a good handle on this part already, I think) and what could be
done about it.
Specifically (for discussion at the meeting):
1. Number of destinations - 30K one path is beyond the technology
available today, but it is pushing what parts of the Internet can
support. Right?
CIDRization helps here (and in 2 and 3 below). How can we
better promote CIDRization? Can we do a better job of
identifying who still needs to CIDRize? Are we ready to do
proxy aggregation, and if so on what scale? Under what
circumstances is hostile proxy aggregation (without the
approval of the originator of the routes) justified? What
safeguards should be in place to prevent hostile aggregation
with no approval whatsoever? Or should the ability to do
hostile aggregation be a feature???
2. Number of paths - what is the limit on paths 100k, 200k? Are
there ways to reduce the number of paths at hot spot routers?
a. If the hot spot routers are at the exchanges and the
problems are too many peers would it help to take routing from
a single third party like a route server? Is there something
wrong with the route server model, or the people running the
route server? (save RA flames for the meeting please!)
b. If the problem is peering at too many exchange points with
the same people, would it help to limit your peerings with
other major providers to three or even two exchange points?
This would need to be configured, so would some sort of
registry for this type of configuration help?
3. CPU load. Are the efforts of Cisco in implementing route flap
dampenning paying off? If so, do we anticipate that this will
solve the problem or just buy us time (at this point it may be
very preliminary)? Will the RA RS support dampenning?
If you prefer, I will ask ANS to rent me an asbestos suit and I'll do
my best to lead a discussion on this.
This is just a suggested outline. If you want to lead the discussion,
of course you are welcome to structure the discussion as you see fit.
I'd like to hear your assessment of what the problems are and how you
think the Internet community should be addressing them.
There are people who claim that they are not opposed to the idea of
documenting the routing topology to better coordinate routing
configuration, particularly aggregation, but object to the way it is
currently being done. I'd like to know how it could be better done.
There is also the sticky issue of who will do it, whatever this better
plan happens to be.
Curtis
|