> On Dec 29, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Robin Whittle wrote: >>> http://bill.herrin.us/network/rrgarchitectures.html >> I am calling for strong consensus on rejecting all strategies but A.
I respectfully disagree. I believe there are useful solutions to be had in strategies A, B, D and E. Here's why: Although strategy B may have more up-front deployment issues than strategy A, we'll tend to get a better result in the long term by tackling the problem at its root as strategy B does. Strategy A comes at the problem from the side, creating a slew of nasty subproblems, like with PMTUD. I have no opinion as to whether strategy A or strategy B is a better solution overall, or even a better starting point. I do believe both efforts would benefit from seeing both through engineering and then letting the market choose. As discussed months ago, parallel processing of the RIB combined with techniques to compress the FIB as contemplated by strategy D would extend the useful upper bound of routes in the BGP RIB by at least one and possibly two orders of magnitude. Though this does not extend multihoming as far as some of us would like, it does usefully extend it with far less difficult deployment issues than either Strategy A or Strategy B. Although strategy E is loaded with political minefields, the technical portion of its implementation is both trivial and fully backwards compatible. Strategy E resolves the most serious routing scalability problem, that of keeping the Internet core stable. While it would be nice to solve the other multihoming problems, the only critical one is core stability. I question the wisdom of throwing this approach away prior to demonstrating market acceptance of an alternative. Would anyone object to me assuming that those in favor of rejecting all but strategy A also favor proposals to reject each of the others individually? 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
