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

["William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us>]

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Lixia Zhang <lixia@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 May 2008, Lixia Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>> As I've heard from a few big operators, their shared issue is the scale
>>> limitation of their edge boxes --- they could buy a small number of core
>>> routers that can handle large tables, but they could not afford replacing
>>> hundreds or even up to thousands edge routers that have limited capacity.

> I might have used a wrong word "edge"; someone closer to operations might
> help here.  But the stories I heard are about the ISP routers that do carry
> the full table.

Lixia,

It sounds like you used the right term. "Edge" generally means
customer edge, but in a large operator those customers are often BGP
participants.

If I read you right, what they're saying is that they could accept
upgrading a few very large routers in their core where they talk to
major peers but would find it cost-prohibitive to upgrade all the
routers that talk to what are now BGP customers.

This is a blind alley. See Randy Bush's NANOG presentation, page 47+
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0710/presentations/Bush-v6-op-reality.pdf

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

--
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