[12626] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Traffic locality and other questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Thu Sep 25 17:43:06 1997
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 14:31:02 -0700
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
To: "Sean M. Doran" <smd@clock.org>
CC: Sean Donelan <SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM>, nanog@merit.edu
Sean M. Doran wrote:
>
> If all of these assumptions prove to be invalid, and in
> particular if it is cheaper to build equipment which are
> better at switching very small amounts of data across many
> diverse physical paths,
The cost of building a 1 Tbps/line signle data path router
at the present level of technology: infinity.
Everything is cheaper than that :)
> if a routing scheme that can fully
> exploit this can be developed,
There's no need for L3 routing to be aware of multiplicity of
physical paths underneath.
> and if it is more
> economical to use many small pipes than a few large pipes,
For some reason i doubt it. The general rule -- use transmission
technology presently at the bottom of price/performance @ performance
curve; and replicate it accordingly to reach desireable performance
level.
> then obviously one would be better off not aggregating
> traffic, and perhaps even deaggregating it and its
> complementary reachability information.
You can have deaggregated traffic and still keep aggregated
reacheability information, as long as you constrain topologies
to multiple-parallel-links in otherwise small general graph.
There are no routing technologies which wouild scale for
large general graphs, to my knowledge.
--vadim
