On Nov 16, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > first, thanks for getting a larger model started. > > but i think many of the numbers are off. i have had no time this last > week, and will not for another week. so i will pick on just three, as > examples.
Great, thanks. > > for bgpsec, i would assume a million routers each having the current > signing cert and the next one, i.e. two million total. scattered over > O(100) repositories. Really? I didn't realize such a large estimate was the case. Do others agree with the 1m. Also, the standby cert is a good point, I hadn't factored that in. > the best handle we have on rcynic time today is the ripe repository, > 4,400 objects in 47 seconds, i.e. about .01 secs/obj. and note that, > thank you rsync, time is seriously sub-linear in object count. I just used the numbers that I think you measured and presented at NANOG, etc. You had some sync performance graphs with average #objects and average sync time in the lower right/left corners. I just used those, but that made things seem a little more bleak. > and a roa has it's ee cert built in for free. so there is a factor of > two there. I just put some text to the rationale behind calling this out separately into an email to Tim (on list). Rather than re-type, maybe we can converse over that? > i have not had time to look further, but i think, when numbers are a > factor of two to a factor of six off, and you are multiplying, a bit > more rigor is appropriate. I'm totally happy to address the formulation. It could, very well, be off. However, I think having such a formulation is critical, so can we talk about evolving what's there to something that lets us measure? Thanks, Eric _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
