Subject: Re: MPLS and IS-IS

From: "J. Noel Chiappa" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 17:42:27 -0400

> From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>

    > Noel, no one in their right mind would carry 70K routes in their IGP.

Well, yes, for most people, I reckon. (If you're a singly-homed customer,
absolutely, it makes no sense; just head for the exit. And if you're an IGP,
you're using iBGP between your edge routers anyway.)

But this issue (the roll-over) was reported to me in the context of someone
who was seeing this as a real problem, although I don't know the environment.
Perhaps it was a large, multi-homed site, where they wanted traffic to take
the optimal external exit (and for whatever reason they didn't want to just
filter in a few destinations, and have the rest of the traffic go to the
nearest exit router).

    > For OSPF, it was a design goal to support this.

Well, it was a design goal for OSPF to carry the whole routing table (in part
to avoid having to do anything like iBGP, although this was before BGP
existed). However, I don't think the number "70K" was in evidence at the
time! :-)

	Noel

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 14:52:30 -0700

>> filter in a few destinations, and have the rest of the traffic go to the

    NSI. Remember the old original OSPF working group days Noel. You, Paul T,
    John, Rob, Milo, and me?

>> existed). However, I don't think the number "70K" was in evidence at the

    My memory recalls they were both going on at the same time. This was  
    '89-'90 time frame. OSPF did start first, but BGP began before OSPF was
    done.

Dino

P.S. BTW, is OSPF done?  ;-)