Subject: Re: [RAM] Critical routing problems

From: "Fergie" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 20:40:13 GMT

- -- John Leslie <[email-masked]> wrote:

>Commenting on just this one issue:
>
>Noel Chiappa <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> 
>> When I look at what the problem seems to be (according to the various
>> presentations), it seems to be growth in the size of the routing table
>> (with dynamics of routing table entries coming in second).
>
>This list exists because folks complained about the growth of the
>routing tables.
>
>I agree this growth needs to be moderated; but if the issue were
>_only_ the memory to hold routing tables, I'd tell the folks to stop
>whining and hire people with experience in central-processor design.
>There are a _lot_ of tricks used there to effectively manage large
>memory requirements.
>
>I do not believe that is the only issue, however. Route churn is
>a problem which cannot be fixed with that bag of tricks; and the
>route churn problem depends on the table size.
>
>As mobility (inevitably) becomes more common, the need for real-
>time changes in forwarding paths to end-users will increase the
>demand for real-time changes in routes chosen. This is the pressure
>I believe we most seriously have to moderate. (Before you ask: No
>attempts to outlaw such changes can be successful, IMHO.)
>
>Bottom line: I agree we need to reduce the pressure leading to
>increases in the size of routing tables at the "backbone".
>

These are _exactly_ the issues which the major backbone operators
have been asking us to consider -- for several years now.

It's a shame that it has taken this long to get the attention of
the IAB/IETF. :-)

$.02,

- - ferg

--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg(at)netzero.net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram