RE: (multi6) requirements draft comments

["J. Noel Chiappa" <jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>]

    > From: "Christian Huitema" <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>

    > Isn't it the case that, in order to maintain optimality in the face of
    > a graph change, you have to entirely revisit your aggregation
    > structure, which would be akin to renumbering the Internet? 

First, you'd only have to renumber if you wanted to to maintain absolute
optimality. Since absolute optimality produces a routing table of size
e*ln(N), i.e. as I mentioned before a 60 entry routing table for a 10^8 node
network, somehow I don't think we have to maintain absolute optimality!

Second (and this is really irrelevant, given the point above, but in true
routing-graph-theory-geek style I mention it for completeness) I expect that
the vast majority of connectivity changes in a graph can be handled with a
renumbering over a scope that's less than global.

	Noel