Re: [RRG] Routers in DFZ

[Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>]

John,
> Done.  draft-ietf-idr-bgp-multisession-03 provides the necessary 
> protocol machinery.
While that draft looks reasonable for its intended purpose, I think Dino 
was talking about actually shoveling less crap around, router by 
router.  That having been said, I've somewhat lost the plot here.  Is 
the point to allow for priority processing of certain types of 
information in the face of a performance problem?  If so, that's a fine 
*tactical* and incremental approach (although I don't think much of 
using a TCP window as application layer flow control - it leads to bad 
behaviors on both sides when the number of connections increase [See 
RFC-793, Page 42, "Managing the Window").
But to your original point, that one cannot simply assume a linear death 
march, I'd agree.  I think Tony and others' points were that the issue 
here is in cost and development curves, looking many MANY years out.  If 
we can find an even better approach to avoid brute force with acceptable 
trade-offs (and those are a lot of ifs), then we've advanced the state 
of the art and that's a good thing.
Eliot

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.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