This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fweimer at bfk.de
Wed Feb 16 11:18:22 CET 2011
* Sander Steffann: > I don't know if this is a waranted use of PI space. The problem here > is that the extra route has a global cost for everyone. This is an extremely short-sighted viewpoint. More routing table entries enable finer-grained routing decisions. In many cases, this leads to improvements according to some cost metric. There are isolated inefficiencies, but you cannot remove them without decreasing overall performance. Isn't BGP UPDATE rate more of an issue than the table size these days, anyway? -- Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]