And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)

Alexei Roudnev alex at relcom.net
Mon Oct 24 06:41:36 UTC 2005


Randy; we are living on Earth with small size (only 6,000 km in radius), so
we will never see unlimited grouth in multihomed networks.

It is not a problem. We are not building Internet for the whole universe.
Good old Moore can deal with our planet very well.
I repeated many times - IPv6 idea of changing multihome approach is VERY BAD
and will not survise for more that 1 - 2 years. (if IPv6 survive at all,
which I have many doubts about).

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com>
To: "Daniel Golding" <dgolding at burtongroup.com>
Cc: "Tony Li" <tony.li at tony.li>; "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com>; "Per Heldal"
<heldal at eml.cc>; <nanog at merit.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)


>
> >> There is a fundamental difference between a one-time reduction in the
> >> table and a fundamental dissipation of the forces that cause it to
> >> bloat in the first place.  Simply reducing the table as a one-off
> >> only buys you linearly more time.  Eliminating the drivers for bloat
> >> buys you technology generations.
> >>
> >> If we're going to put the world thru the pain of change, it seems
> >> that we should do our best to ensure that it never, ever has to
> >> happen again.
> >
> > That's the goal here? To ensure we'll never have another protocol
> > transition? I hope you realize what a flawed statement that is.
>
> tony probably did not think about it because that's not what he
> said at all.  he was speaking of routing table bloat, not
> transitions.
>
> and he was spot on.
>
> randy
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list