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]/
[routing-wg]BGP Update Report
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Oliver Bartels
oliver at bartels.de
Mon Sep 11 20:00:46 CEST 2006
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:34:14 -0700, Vince Fuller wrote: >> As has been said before, and is also readable in that blog entry: the >> system is supposed to create *one* advertisement change when the plane >> is crossing from the "Europe" to the "US" ground station (etc.), not >> 1000+. Interesting. It sounds to me like the difference between theory and practice. >The comment still applies. Imagine that this system were implemented globally >on all international/intercontinental air routes. It would still be nice to >avoid having each of those airplanes cause a globally-visible routing update >whenever it crosses some geographical boundary. The problem is physics: The speed of light is about 300.000km/s in air and about 200.000km/s in fibre, which means a VPN solution causes an _additional_ >70ms delay for some additional 7000km VPN distance. No, VPN and NAT and PA and shim are not the solution for todays mobile communications demands. From the view point of the developer of such an intercontinental communications system todays internet technology looks outdated, the BGP re-anouncement is just a hack. Indeed, RFC1661 is dated July 1994. This is just another example for the obvious demand of a true dynamic routing system beeing capable to handle large numbers of prefixes and dynamic changes in the routing table. Other demand results from mobile networks, IPv6 PI etc. The demand _is_ there, simply saying "don't use PI, do keep 200 customers rules (IPv6), don't accept small prefixes, don't permit dynamic changes, do wait for our perfect shim solution which takes short additional 10 years to develop, do purely theoretical discussions on geoadressing" as the "restrictive approach" is not the solution. Either the Internet community will find good answers to these demands, or the markets will find solutions without the Internet community ... Ceterum Censeo: BGP_Standard_Update subito, IPv6 PI subito ... Kind Regards Oliver Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]