[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [RRG] Tunnel fragmentation/reassembly for RRG map-and-encaps architectures
tony,
>> Well, we're here because of the concern that BGP4 updates
>> will become prohibitive as multihoming expands, aren't we?
>
> Nope. We're here because routing convergence will continue to
> degrade as the number of prefixes scales. There are multiple
> reasons
> for the scaling issue, and BGP is irrelevant to the scaling problem,
> as the scaling of the information content is independent of the
> delivery mechanism.
the design-goals doc. - section 3.8 states
"A solution is strongly desired to provide routing quality equivalent
to what is available today or better."
where
"The quality of the routes that are computed can be measured by a number
of metrics, such as convergence, stability, and stretch."
as convergence gets affected by approaches that are not preserving the
locality principle due to the ITR-ETR relationship they involve (see
also e-mail from Yakov along the same line)
-> how are they positioned as fulfilling the initial design goals ?
thanks
-dimitri.
> Tony
>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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