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).

Paul Jakma      p...@jakma.org  Key ID: 64A2FF6A
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)

rrg mailing list

Reply via email to