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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michel Py
michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us
Tue Oct 4 18:19:00 CEST 2011
> Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > My dystopian view is that this won't be fixed but instead > vendors will have to create routers that can handle many > million of routes in the next decades. Indeed. And, somewhere at Cisco and Juniper, someone doesn't mind that this will require very expensive TCAM (or whatever comes next) in the forwarding plane and fancy ASICs to push packets at Terabit wire speed. That's what their business is about. > Jörgen Eriksson wrote: > As they have done during the last 20+ years. This is the way > of the Internet. If you want to be there - keep upgrading! Yes, > it cost money. Big money. And if your business case does not > include this - sorry, but then you have done a really bad job! I will not be sorry. Buying out the customers of incapable competitors when they go belly up does not shock me. Michel.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]