Flow Based Routing/Switching (Was: "Does TCP Need an Overhaul?" (internetevolution, via slashdot))

Sat Apr 5 10:16:01 UTC 2008

Paul Vixie wrote:
[..]
> i wouldn't want to get in an argument with somebody who was smart and savvy
> enough to invent packet switching during the year i entered kindergarden,
> but, somebody told me once that keeping information on every flow was *not*
> "inexpensive."  should somebody tell dr. roberts?

Isn't the reason that "NetFlow" (or v10 which is the the IETF/Cisco 
named IPFIX) exists the side-effect of having routers doing "flow based 
routing" aka "keeping an entry per IP flow, thus using that entry for 
every next packet to quickly select the outgoing interface instead of 
having to go through all the prefixes" ?
The flows are in those boxes, but only for stats purposes exported with 
NetFlow/IPFIX/sFlow/etc. Apparently it was not as fast as they liked it 
to be and there where other issues. Thus what exactly is new here in his 
boxes that has not been tried and failed before?

Greets,
  Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080405/2cbe6dc4/attachment.sig>