|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: protocols that don't meet the need...
How do you count # of networks? 8M means - 8M of independent, multihomed companies. What is the reson to expect so many? Don't forget that today's number of networks is multiplied few times because you (foten) need to get more than 1 allocation. And what is a problem with 8M networks in next 8 years (if we easily handle 200K just now)? No, this model is well scalable and we better solve other, REAL problems, not mistical _# of networks_ one. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Per Heldal" <[email protected]> To: "Mikael Abrahamsson" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:45 AM Subject: Re: protocols that don't meet the need... > > > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:31:56 +0100 (CET), "Mikael Abrahamsson" > <[email protected]> said: > [snip] > > 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. > > agree! > > > > > PI space for multihoming and AS number growth is a bad thing for scaling > > and economics, however you look at it. > > agree! > > > > > 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. > > agree! > > [snip] > > All is well if shim6 succeeds it seems ... 5-10 years into the future. > Do we all agree to postpone v6 till then? > > If not there's a need for an intermediary solution. To me it seems like > people want 2 things: > > 1. A working solution. The only alternative with current technology is > PI end-site assignments. > > 2. Reasonable predictability. To make ever-lasting technologies and > policies may be the dream in some research communities. The rest of us > have to work with what we got and accept that we have to upgrade and > make substatial changes to our networks from time to time. An > alternative to satisfy those who fear the long term effect of a growing > routing-table could be temporary end-site assignments from dedicated > address-blocks. At some point in the future, when new-and-mature > technology exist, the RIR-community could decide on new policies and > decide to re-claim the entire block on e.g. a 24-month notice. > > ... just my $.02 compromise ;) > > //per > -- > Per Heldal > http://heldal.eml.cc/ >
|