Re: A new spin on multihoming: multihoming classes.

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> my impression is that large (and small) providers would like fairly
>> stable routing which converges predictably in reasonable time.  if that
>> can be done with ten, 100k, or 5,000,000 routes is not so important.
>> but, as i said, that is merely my impression.

> What are you saying? That there is no problem?

i don't see how my words could be interpreted that way.

> That BGP implementations need to get better and stop muliplying flaps?

if indeed bgp does that, and it is detrimental to stability, convergence,
etc., then i would think that fixing this would be one (possibly small)
tactical action to progress toward the goals i thought i was outlining.

> If we want an 8k routing table

maybe i need to be more explicit.  it is not clear to me that this is a
useful criterion.

but, to indulge in your tactical view

> if we allow PI and/or /48s out of PA space in the DFZ without any
> restrictions

i am not aware of this being seriously proposed.  the discussions i am
hearing imply /[23..36] in the inter-provider dfz.  /48s are for sites,
and i for one, am not inclined to recommend listening to /48s from peers.

randy