In einer eMail vom 12.01.2010 19:53:50 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt [email protected]:
after summarizing the main points, I'd also like to clarify the following I caught from this thread of exchange: > there are about 10 times fewer active AS numbers than there are active > prefixes. So flat-routing on AS numbers would gain one order of > magnitude > immediately. I've seen similar statement several times by now. I suppose people understand that routing on AS numbers *alone* is not a feasible solution. ASes come in all size and colors. Some AS could be a small company; some other AS can cross multiple continents. So AS does not represent a granularity suited for today's routing needs. Routing on ASes can get one reachability, but not performance, load balance, traffic engineering etc etc. Right. By "no performance" I think you mean the bad stretch factor emphasized by Krioukov, applying to hierarchical routing concepts other than TARA, Traffic engineering: Indeed, only TARA provides a rearview mirror (enabling a communication between a congested node and just those who would use it for transit) Moore's Law (only TARA would enable its applicability to IP forwarding). Mobility: TARA would help MIP4 enourmously and by the same token would do more for HIP than the HIP-origin RFC about rendex-vous server. Heiner PS: If I knew as much about the internet as you do, Lixia, I would certainly detect many more advantages of TARA :-)
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
