Is anyone actually USING IP QoS?
Vadim Antonov
avg at kotovnik.com
Tue Jun 15 20:51:52 UTC 1999
Vijay Gill <wrath at cs.umbc.edu> wrote:
>> Scalability on the Internet pretty much means that algorithms should run
>> in O(log(N)**M) where N is the total number of end-points and M is
>> constant. (Note that non-CIDR unicast routing doesn't fit this
>> criterion, but CIDR does).
> Reference to this?
I guess it's my private rule-of-thumb. (Antique Kleinrock and Klein, maybe?)
Anyway, O(N) seems to be infeasible (as at least some network components will
have to scale at super-Moore's law exponential rates), and O(log(N)) - too strict
(all dynamic routing algorithms are super-linear, but still work).
The design based on O(P(log(N))) algorithms was demonstrated to work in practice
(DV of SPF with route aggregation). O(P(N)) (non-hierarchial routing) was
demonstrated to fail during the CIDR deployment saga.
>The pressure is being applied now. Vendors however had a lock on this
>market, witness how long it took for cisco to give oc-12 atm interfaces.
>They didn't move till uunet put the GRF into the core.
The pressure is called competition :)
Unfortunately, large switching equipment vendors still didn't get a clue on
how to build real fast routers. (Nortel may be an exception, with their
stake in Avici; however i have serious misgivings about ability of Avici
design to deliver on promises. Hypertorus is not what one wants to use
for general permutations. And i find their claim to be inventors of massively
parallel routing simply hilarious. Obviously, their marketing department
employs Al Gore as a PR consultant. Never mind that the only reference to the
name "Avici" i was able to find is the particularly hot kind of hell in
Buddhist mythology :)
--vadim
More information about the NANOG
mailing list