Re: Granularity (was Re: [RRG] ALT + NERD is inelegant & inefficient, compared to APT or Ivip)

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2008-01-24 16:11, David Conrad wrote:
> Brian,
> 
> On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:11 PM, Brian Dickson wrote:
>> It may be that rather than having one problem/solution match-up to
>> consider, that there are two:
>>
>> dual-homed
>> multi-homed (N>2)
>>
>> I'd argue that the requirements of each differ, and there can be
>> significant scaling benefits from splitting them out, and handling
>> each separately.
> ...
>> What do folks think?
> 
> My gut feeling (FWIW) is that this would be a mistake.  The assumptions
> that you make differentiating the N=2 vs. N>2 cases appear to be
> subjective and dependent on life as we know it now, not life as how we
> might reasonably project it to be.  What is to say that in the 'near'
> (for some value of that variable) future, I won't want my cellphone
> router connecting my PAN multi-homed to the (say) 6 cellular providers
> it can find signal for?

Another point is that a normal scenario for a dual homed site wishing
to change one of its ISPs would be to triple-home for a while (i.e.
add ISP C while retaining ISPs A and B) and then drop A or B once things
are stable with C. So changing from 2 to 3 and then back to 2 should
be a simple operation, not two changes of mode.

> 
> I'm not sure that coming up with an architecture that builds in these
> sorts of assumptions won't end up biting us painfully in the end.

Yes, there we go predicting the future again...

   Brian


--
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