[12224] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: too many routes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Traina)
Wed Sep 10 11:19:41 1997
To: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
cc: jtk@titania.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 10 Sep 1997 02:22:41 PDT."
<199709100922.CAA10311@quest.pluris.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 07:41:38 -0700
From: Paul Traina <pst@juniper.net>
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
Subject: RE: too many routes
Joseph T. Klein <jtk@titania.net> wrote:
>The routes issue historically comes down to the fact that Sprint did not
>want to convert from Cisco 4000 to Ciscos that had larger memory capacity.
Sprint never used cisco 4000s in the backbone. Just FYI.
Historically, memory limitation was because CSC/4 board in AGS/+
routers had memory soldered in. The box was absolute top of the line
when it started to fall over.
Not to mention the obvious problem, the routing table was growing
exponentially. I don't care how much memory you put in a box, if
we hadn't solved that problem, the game would have been over.
>Memory is cheap these days ... the big boys just don't wish to have a
>free market.
This statement shows that the level of comprehension of the issues
remains absymally low.
It is NOT memory; it is CPU which is a limiting factor. Even the
mainframes would keel over on routing computations if the drastic
measures weren't taken to aggregate and dampen.
Absolutely.
