In einer eMail vom 16.03.2010 08:34:27 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt

On Mar 15, 2010, at 4:30 AM, _heinerhum...@aol.com_ 
(  wrote:

In einer eMail vom 15.03.2010 08:00:10 Westeuropäische Normalzeit  schreibt 
_li...@cs.ucla.edu_ ( :


1/ I am not quite clear why collecting topological links is the #1  
question for RRG/routing scalability solution development

2/ my group has been collecting Internet AS level topology for the  last 5 
the following one is the most recent paper:
_The  (in)Completeness of the Observed Internet AS-level Structure_ 
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Feb 2010.

although the paper just got published, some of the numbers may have  
already changed in reality. However one fact should remain true: by  putting 
data from all the sources we can get our hand on, the  collected results 
still miss majority of the peering links between  ASes.

Thanks for the above document reference. My guess: You collect this  
AS-level topological network information just for academic interest. i.e.  for 
doing some interesting studies. That's  all.

we do not do studies just for academic interest.
The goal of the above is to explain what one can or cannot observe about  
the AS connectivity.

I should have said "for doing off-line purposes". I have expressed the  
"on-line" objectives many times, some of them see below, which I think go 
beyond  keeping the internet running just as well as is currently still the 

This is not at all my point. My question is: What would be achievable  in 
terms of better routing, if  the same kind of topological  information were 
available in inter-domain routing as is the case in  intra-domain routing !

I understand, and my point (based on the data) is that inter-domain  
topological info is largely *not* available, and for a  reason.

Nor would my TARA-model insist on being fed with all topology info,  even 
more: its goal is to skim the available topology information. See  below from 
my previous email, I didn't mention the two additional side effects:  1) no 
single prefix and  2) no single route to be disseminated/collected  anymore.

And there is  indeed a very long list of achievabilities including:
- Mobility  without home-agent/care-of-address server by well-scoped 
broadcast search  messages

Any comments to  this mobility objective?

- Congestion  handling by detouring  and not, a la  re-ECN,  by  slowing 
down (video :-( ???) transmission 
- Enabling any  detours (incl. crankback using ones) and getting rid of the 
loop phantom  fear

Any comments to this TE objective?

- 99 %  state-less Multicast

Any comments here?

- speeding up  next hop determination by 20 x 100 = 2000 % 


By insisting  on DV this group prevents all major progress, including that 
progress none  of us is currently able to think of. Remember the IBM 
commercial! Rather  asking the transport goods for where we are, we should 
a networking  layer technology for the benefit of services  above.


rrg  mailing  list

rrg mailing list

Reply via email to