On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote: > |>> We have determined beyond the shadow of a doubt > |>> that the status quo is not, at this time, self-reducing. > |> > |> Under IRTF process rules, only the RG Chairs have the authority > |> to make a consensus determination. > | > |That is an... interesting... refutation of established fact. > > I'm unaware of what established facts those might be. Let me set forth the > facts as I know them: > The IRTF operates under the procedures documented in RFC 2014, and under the
Fellas, Reality check! The status quo is: the number of entries in the BGP table has consistently grown and continues to grow year over year since BGP's inception. See: http://bgp.potaroo.net/ Regardless of pronoun choice, no consensus call is necessary to cite this well established fact. Had I overreached from this statement, you might have cause to throw the rulebook at me. Since I didn't, you don't. > |To be clear what I'm thinking, it seems that if nothing new comes out > |of the routing world, we'll eventually hit the wall where PI-style > |multihoming cannot grow. Then economics will rule it out except for > |very large customers. > > Or, in another form, the cost per global prefix will grow (in constant > dollars). Five bucks says the current trend is the opposite of this. If you collect the cost data from yesteryear and apply the formula at http://bill.herrin.us/network/bgpcost.html I bet you find that the cost per BGP prefix has been gradually falling for some time. 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
