Bill, |<[email protected]> wrote: |> It is not known with any scientific or engineering accuracy when |> vanilla BGP4 will reach an economic or technical scaling limit (i.e. |> when it becomes financially or physically impossible to continue |> beefing up core BGP4 routers to cope with growth in the size or |> update frequency of the BGP4 routing table). | |I've been chewing on this one. Is it correct? Are we unable to say |with scientific or engineering certainty that BGP4 has an technical or |financial upper bound somewhere prior to 10M entries?
That's correct. We know of no hard upper bound to BGP or (more importantly) the routing architecture as it currently exists. It is apparent that unless there is some significant progress somehow, the cost and/or complexity of running the current architecture is going to start to climb. |If not, what's the case in favor of focusing any efforts on non-BGP |solutions at this point? I don't know of a good one. Until we have an architecture that allows us to carry fewer prefixes, simply replacing BGP will not be a net win. |And what's the justification for maintaining |the IETF recommendation that the RIRs impose artificial restrictions |on the minimum allocation size? Or for that matter any restrictions at |all on IPv6 assignment in multihomed environments? Adding more prefixes will hasten the inevitable. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
