Hi Paul, I am replying to your message
Re: [rrg] 2 Possible Consensus Items http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg06277.html in this earlier thread: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg06163.html since you were discussing Geoff Huston's research and the question of the current interdomain routing system and its routers scaling. Geoff's research is: > In the "Re: [rrg] draft-narten-radir-problem-statement-05.txt" thread > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg06152.html > > and in "BGP in 2009": > http://www.potaroo.net/presentations/2010-02-01-bgp2009.pdf You wrote, in part: It's possible that the current architecture of the internet is holding back growth that should otherwise be there. Yes. If we concentrate only on non-mobile networks, there are two broad aspects of the routing scaling problem: 1 - The unreasonable, arguably unscalable, burden placed on the DFZ routers individually, and on the DFZ control plane in general, by the set of end-user networks which currently get portability, multihoming and inbound TE by the only means available: getting their own space and advertising it as PI prefixes in the DFZ. 2 - The much larger number of end-user networks which could use 2 or more ISPs and which want or need portability, multihoming or inbound TE but don't have it because they are unable to get the space and advertise it. (Perhaps a subset of these could do it, but don't because they known how unscalable it is.) The growth in BGP advertised PI prefixes is the simplest measure of the first aspect - which is like the tip of the iceberg. The less visible part is point 2, like the main body of the iceberg. Then there is mobility - which has a prominent place in the RRG Charter's description of the routing scaling problem. Broadly speaking, mobility is a whole other iceberg, so far completely submerged. So even if Moore's Law keeps up in some acceptable manner with the pace of growth in the number of PI prefixes in the DFZ, this doesn't help with point 2 or with mobility. Sorry I haven't had time to revisit our discussions in early February. I have a backlog of RRG messages to read and respond to - mainly discussion following from my critiques of several architectures - and I need to give priority to paying work. - Robin _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg