Re: [RRG] Consensus? IPv4 scaling problem must be solved directly, not by relying on migration to IPv6

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

On 2008-05-26 16:16, Tony Li wrote:
>  
> 
> |However, this isn't very relevant to RRG goals. What is relevant,
> |IMHO, is divining whether the BGP4 system for IPv4 will hit a
> |catastrophic scaling limit within a foreseeable timescale. If the
> |answer is 'yes' we need a first-class solution for IPv4; if the
> |answer is 'no' we only need a first-class solution for IPv6. Since
> |my divination skills are weak, it seems safer to seek a first-class
> |solution for both.
> 
> 
> s/BGP4 system/current routing architecture/
> 
> To date, no one has demonstrated a routing architecture that scales without
> aggregation, and aggregation is THE sore point.
> 
> Can we please not pick on BGP?  It simply confuses the issue.

I didn't mean to. I agree the argument applies to all conceivable
EGPs that rely on binary address aggregation, and I'm not aware
of an alternative to that.

   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