On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:48:44AM -0800, Tony Li wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 7:06 AM, <hannu.flinck@nsn.com> > <hannu.flinck@nsn.com> wrote: > >> But the key issue is to who gains the benefits and who pays for it. >> The >> content providers (hosting companies) will not pay for a solution that >> only offers drawbacks to them, but benefits would go to ISP. There is >> no >> incentive for content houses to deploy such a solution. > > > The incentive for everyone is to deploy a scalable routing architecture > that serves us for the long term. Regardless of the proposal that RRG > puts forward, it's thermodynamically impossible that it will have no > cost. There will be deployment costs, forwarding plane changes, and a > mapping subsystem to support. > > Having a functioning Internet for our great grandchildren is the benefit > and without that, the hosting companies are simply out of business. You know all know, of course I agree with Tony; but actually I have a stronger version of the statement, which includes the observation that history will not treat us kindly if we loose the great (and really, democraticizing) thing that is the Internet. And what is worse, if, despite the considerable intellectual capability represented by our community, we couldn't come together over something as important as the Internet, well, that would be an epic disaster in the history of humanity. What is at stake is no less than that. But then you know all of that. Dave
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature