(IPng 5000) Re: Last Call: IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture to Proposed Standard

> 
> 
> bill,  
> 
> i'm surprised by your remark.
> i thought you have been around long enough to understand this.
> we've been over all this before.
> 
> the complexity of that computation is driven by two things - 
> the cardinality of the set of visible nodes in the global topology graph,
> and the complexity of the topology connecting those nodes.  
> (note that "node" here does not imply a router but whole networks).
> 
> of these two things, we cannot readily control the edge topology of the
> graph, so we are only left with controlling the cardinality of the node set of
> the graph if we wish to influence that complexity.
> 
> of course, you can argue that we don't need to care about the problem - 
> that somehow processors will keep getting fast enough fast enough to
> retain reasonable convergence times.
> 
> but then you are betting on a race between two exponentials -
> and are making the bet that the smaller exponent will win.    
> 
> i know *i* don't want to wager the future on that bet.
> 
> 	-mo


My argument is that the basic premise that the assumptions wrt the
cardinality of the set of visable nodes in the topology graph
-may- be wrong.  Other than that, I agree with you.  Chalk it up
to a fit of Noel-Stev syndrome. With a bit of rest, I'm sure
it will pass.  (and I do recommend "Small Forwarding Tables for
Fast Routing Lookup" from SigCom'97, which is one more reason why
I think these arguments just might be off)

-- 
--bill