> 'Pedro' being mentioned... Is it me? :-)

Nope :)

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-marques-idr-aggregate-00.txt

Best,
R.


On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez
<[email protected]> wrote:
> 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