Hi Folks, The Summary of Routing Architectures discussed in the RRG, posted at http://bill.herrin.us/network/rrgarchitectures.html includes:
Strategy F. Do nothing. (RFC 1887 ยง 4.4.1) I propose that we REJECT strategy F. As we use it now, BGP lacks sufficient scalability to see the Internet into the coming decades. We constrain the growth of the BGP RIB by disadvantaging small, innovative organizations when they seek IP addresses from the regional registries. We constrain the growth of the BGP RIB by refusing to offer consumer level broadband products capable of multihoming. Then we spend some $2B per year getting the routes that do make it into BGP to work. [Herrin BGP Cost] This damages the Internet, damages invention and ultimately damages us. I ask you to post either, "I AGREE that we should reject strategy F" or "I DISAGREE; strategy F should continue to be considered.". I'd also appreciate a few words about why or why not. If we have a strong consensus to reject strategy F, the Summary of Routing Architectures will be updated to reflect that we have considered and rejected it. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
