RE: (multi6) requirements draft comments

["Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>]

Andrew Partan wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 01:44:45PM -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
> > If you fold the above complexity into your graph along with
> the other
> > ~12000 ASs that are prefix origins today, and managing the
> > topology-names becomes an administrative burden as topology is
> > constantly shifting.
>
> No, not if the system does the work for you.  Managing the topology
> abstractions is something the system should do, not people.
>
Reality says that operations people really like to believe they know how
the routers are configured. To make the system Noel is describing work,
the entire system would have to be self configuring, else everytime a
customer connected to another provider each existing provider would have
to reconfigure their interface to that customer.

> > > the users have to renumber when they change providers, and
> >
> > Actually they have to renumber everytime their neighbors change
> > providers as well, because the entire graph changes around them.
>
> No, only if they change their attachment point.  If your neighor
> changes his attachment point, he renumbers, not you.

If he changes the entire graph so that it does not fit neatly in the
aggrigate, then everyone who is disrupted in the more granular space
will have to readdress.

Tony