Just to add a bit more of entropy...

As part of my PhD, I'm working on a way to reduce the Internet's core
routing tables by looking at prefixes that can be aggregated. I'm
following this discussion, because of that and I suddenly see a
'Pedro' being mentioned... Is it me? :-)

Best regards,
/PA

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Russ,
>
>> Yes.
>>
>> Sorry, but it is always true that by removing information you always
>> lose optimality (you increase stretch). Whether that removal is done at
>> the edge or in the core, the result is always the same. There are two
>> ironclad rules of routing:
>>
>> - Removing information decreases optimal routing.
>
> No.
>
> If you remove information which is redundant and when such removal
> will not result in even a single bit of sub-optimal routing what you
> wrote above is false "ironclad rule".
>
> Also the critical piece is that the determination when and what should
> be removed must be 100% automated. There is no way where manual
> intervention would be required for any scheme to work right. And your
> proposal does require manual NOC intervention as you have already
> confirmed today.
>
> The proposal from Pedro however is automated, adjust itself to
> topology changes as well as removed only redundant information where
> such removal does not impact a single bit routing optimality.
>
> Rgs,
> R.
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to