|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)
Randy; we are living on Earth with small size (only 6,000 km in radius), so we will never see unlimited grouth in multihomed networks. It is not a problem. We are not building Internet for the whole universe. Good old Moore can deal with our planet very well. I repeated many times - IPv6 idea of changing multihome approach is VERY BAD and will not survise for more that 1 - 2 years. (if IPv6 survive at all, which I have many doubts about). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" <[email protected]> To: "Daniel Golding" <[email protected]> Cc: "Tony Li" <[email protected]>; "Fred Baker" <[email protected]>; "Per Heldal" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 2:16 PM Subject: Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) > > >> There is a fundamental difference between a one-time reduction in the > >> table and a fundamental dissipation of the forces that cause it to > >> bloat in the first place. Simply reducing the table as a one-off > >> only buys you linearly more time. Eliminating the drivers for bloat > >> buys you technology generations. > >> > >> If we're going to put the world thru the pain of change, it seems > >> that we should do our best to ensure that it never, ever has to > >> happen again. > > > > That's the goal here? To ensure we'll never have another protocol > > transition? I hope you realize what a flawed statement that is. > > tony probably did not think about it because that's not what he > said at all. he was speaking of routing table bloat, not > transitions. > > and he was spot on. > > randy >
|