Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: protocols that don't meet the need...
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:31:56 +0100 (CET)


On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Daniel Roesen wrote:

There is no way to do traffic engineering with any shim6-like system
like one can do with BGP as shim6 is a completely host-centric solution.
It has no clue about upstream/downstream/peering, ASses etc. Those
things that actually make topology and economics. That's aside all the
other administrative nightmares associated.

The current routing model doesn't scale. I don't want to sit 5 years from now needing a router that'll handle 8 million routes to get me through the next 5 years of route growth.

PI space for multihoming and AS number growth is a bad thing for scaling and economics, however you look at it.

Shim6 would hopefully curb the prefix growth very early in the growth curve as single entities won't need AS to multihome between two different ISPs.

I do believe in a completely new solution for multihoming than what we have today, shim6 is the first I've seen so far, I'm open to other suggestions though. Current way of doing it (AS+PI) gives me the creeps when I extrapolate into the future.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike () swm pp se


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]