[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Long term clean-slate only for the RRG?
> >>> Perhaps we should first agree that there is a need a *short term*
> >>> solution for both IPv4 and IPv6. The following (from Tony's e-mail
> >>> on 5/26/2008) is relevant to the discussion on whether there is
> >>> such a need:
> >>> Well, Ross Callon has been quoted as saying that the Juniper
> >>> implementation will have no problems up through many millions
> >>> of routes.
> >>> Now, conceptually, that could happen tomorrow. However, at the
> >>> current growth rates, that's likely to be many years.
> >> The routing table size problem is not the only problem.
> > Good. So, at least we seems to agree that we do not need LISP
> > to deal with the routing table size.
> No, you didn't read the sentence carefully, I said "not the only
> problem". There is problem with any database that gets too large.
> Yakov, the vendor side of it is one thing and most of our products can
> support large tables. That's not what I'm worried about. I'm worried
> about the increase in OpEx and control plane performance for the
Wrt OpEx how exactly does LISP going to reduce it, and who are the
parties that are going to see that reduction ?
Wrt control plane performance, what are the problems that LISP is
going to solve ? And if there are already existing solutions to
these problems, then why LISP's solution is better ?
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg