On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:41 AM, David Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jun 9, 2008, at 8:07 PM, William Herrin wrote: >> The identified problem is: > >> find a way to drastically reduce the $8000/year cost of each IPv4 >> prefix in the core. > > I'd be curious as to how you derived this number.
Hi David, http://bill.herrin.us/network/bgpcost.html The source numbers change with time. Feel free to plug any realistic source numbers into the formula that you please. The end result will have the same impact: the cost is nontrivial. If you want to challenge the methodology, I respectfully ask that you find someone who does cost analysis for a living to assist you with the particulars. I had a professional cost analyst review and validate it. Same guy who got the V22 Osprey canceled before Congress put it back. >> Shifting focus to IPv6 abandons the problem. > > Not really, since generally IPv6 routes and IPv4 routes are combined when > computing routing load. If we do nothing, by what date do you expect IPv6 to exceed even 2% of the total routing load? I stand by my statement. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
