a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)

Edward B. DREGER eddy+public+spam at noc.everquick.net
Thu Feb 16 00:52:36 UTC 2006

PJ> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:41:15 +0000 (GMT)
PJ> From: Paul Jakma

PJ> <aside: text below seems to reply to me specifically, but for some strange
PJ> reason you decided to strip my address from your reply.>

That portion did, but the rest of my message did not.  VZW's 1xRTT 
service was getting ugly, so I didn't re-paste your headers from the 
original message.

PJ> > BTW, Paul, FixedOrbit reports 701 as having ~1500 peers and downstreams.
PJ> > As interconnected as even they are, that's still a far cry from the
PJ> > full-mesh O(N^2) situation you seemed to suggest.
PJ> I'm not sure what bearing any specific number has on O(n^2) behaviour.

O(N^2) only becomes problematic [when it actually happens and] when the 
net result is large.  For a given N, O(N^2) can be smaller thatn O(ln N) 
if the latter has a smaller coefficient.

Moreover, I'm convinced the problem isn't O(N^2) in practice.  Someone 
with more math skills than any poster in this thread (self included) 
needs to weigh in, but... again...

Empirically speaking, how many different transits service the same 
geographic areas _and_ will share a downstream?  "Lots" of providers in 
1 Wilshire, Telehouse NY, PAIX, et cetera, yet any of those locations 
is lucky to have 1% of the total transit networks.

I'll spell it out again:  In reality, one need not worry about each 
transit AS sharing an ASN with every other transit AS.  The Internet is 
not a full mesh, peering is not full-mesh, and it baffles me no end why 
so many people think coop ASNs _would_ be full mesh.

Stop.  Examine.  Think.  Then respond.

PJ> However, if you want to look at specific numbers, plug '10' in there, then
PJ> try '20'.

I started out with 100.  See previous posts.  Now, show me the market 
with 100 ASes where downstreams will connect to every last combination 
of them.  BTW: With the status quo, each downstream needs its own ASN 
and announces its own prefixes.

Let's also keep in mind the self-bounding nature of the problem.  Hint:

	30k transit ASes * 30k transit ASes / 2 = 450M combinations

Does anyone here really believe that 450M people will dual home, and 
that _all_ will have _separate_ provider combinations?

Coop ASNs/IP save ASNs and aggregate routes.  Full stop.

Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/
A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita
DO NOT send mail to the following addresses:
davidc at brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq at intc.net -*- sam at everquick.net
Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.

More information about the NANOG mailing list