nanog mailing list archives
Re: The Big Squeeze
From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser () martigny ai mit edu>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 01:12:50 -0500 (EST)
Craig Nordin supposedly said:
Shouldn't the big boys ... be forced to come up with a fairer solution?by who?An even playing field where those who can only get a few class C addresses are not excluded from multiple peering points. I think that this is fairer to *everyone*. So far, we have two unilateral decisions by those powerful enough to
Under current routing protocols, and current router hardware, the current "wisdom" is that there will be a meltdown somewhere between 60 & 100,000 routes depending on who you ask. The /19 filtering is basically a defense mechanism to protect current infrastructure. There are a number of vendors who claim equipment either just becoming available or will be available shortly that can double or triple these limits. As to how long such an upgrade will take to hit the major backbone providers and be field tested, I would suspect 18 months or so. ---> Phil - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: The Big Squeeze, (continued)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Jim Jagielski (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Nathan Stratton (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Pete Kruckenberg (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Jim Jagielski (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Avi Freedman (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Michael Shields (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Philip J. Nesser II (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Craig Nordin (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Philip J. Nesser II (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Michael Dillon (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Michael Dillon (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Kim Hubbard (Mar 01)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Nathan Stratton (Mar 02)
- Re: The Big Squeeze Randy Bush (Mar 02)
