On Mar 14, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Paul Jakma wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Robin Whittle wrote:
I thought that you were arguing against the existence of the
routing scaling problem, because in your first message in this
thread, you wrote:
> However, it does not seem justified to say the current routing
> architecture has a scaling problem.
Since I have difficulty understanding what you describe as your
"scribblings" in a manner you agree with,
If a person disagrees that a hypothesis has been proven, it does not
of itself follow that the person believes the hypothesis has been
disproven.
You seem to exclude "Insufficient evidence at this time to draw a
conclusion" from the set of valid views people may hold on a topic
(as does the straw poll that led to me post).
regards,
--
Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Necessity hath no law.
-- Oliver Cromwell
it is interesting to watch this series of exchange between Paul and
Robin:)
One position states that we face serious routing scalability problem
today.
another position states that insufficient evidence exists today to
support the above.
If I take on a 3rd position: this debate seems a supporting evidence
for what we discussed at Hiroshima meeting (see my presentation on
behalf of the evolution solution team, http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~lixia/aggregation.pdf
, slide 4),
- Internet is big and diverse -> routing scalability problem
is not universal
- Internet has no boss -> no universal buy‐in, no flag day/year/decade
Thus we need solutions that can be deployed by individual parties who
need it, and can provide clearly identifiable returns (slide 5)
Lixia
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
