Tony Hain wrote: > > The problem I do have with it is the > lack of aggregation in the IGP that would result. While flat routing is > not a problem for a small network, it wouldn't work when the network > reached any significant size.
Define 'significant'. According to Brian Carpenter (28/11/2002): > > The question is, at what scale does route aggregation > begin to matter? The sort of VPN-based or merger-and- > acquisition based networks we are talking about don't seem > to be anywhere near that scale; we know that flat routing > of thousands of prefixes is possible. So it may be > philosophically unsettling, but I don't think it is > operationally unsettling. I freely admit my experience with routing tables is insufficient to know where this cut-off is, but the gist I've been getting is 'hundreds - easy', 'thousands - doable'. Am I hearing wrong? -- Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
