RE: [RRG] cache issues in LISP and CONS - it's bad . . .

[<louise.burness@bt.com>]

Bits cut 

> 
> Back at the beginning of time, we had a hosts file and we had 
> RIP. As we outgrew these choices, we replaced them with DNS 
> (a pull based mapping system) and BGP (a push based mapping 
> system). We're talking about replacing/supplementing BGP in 
> what is not the first table-size crisis while DNS chugs along 
> happy as a clam. This says something about the relative 
> merits of push versus pull mapping systems. That entry-level 
> DNS servers cost $500 while entry-level BGP routers cost 
> $30,000 says even more.
> 
 Does this really say anything about the relative merits of push versus
pull?
I rather thought DNS chugs along because it does not have to handle the
same amount of changes that BGP does? Ok, the churn problem is harder if
you try push, but people expect to be able to make route changes in
seconds, ms being talked about as a target; I rather think to change my
DNS entry takes a little longer.

Louise

--
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