[36305] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Routing System Scaling - Disaster Looming, but Medium-Term Fi
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roeland Meyer)
Mon Apr 2 14:22:54 2001
Message-ID: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F092286039DAC@condor.mhsc.com>
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: "'smd@clock.org'" <smd@clock.org>, nanog@merit.edu
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 11:21:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> From: smd@clock.org [mailto:smd@clock.org]
> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 5:59 AM
> So, there are several Deaths of the Internet which are possible:
>
> -- it's too expensive to keep up with growth, so utilization
> -- we blow up on one of the scaling axes
> -- too much dynamism: poof, our memory isn't
> -- we blow up because while we can handle some of the
> -- inefficient/broken routing: we don't have the power
One observation here, PC133 RAM is getting ever cheaper, as are CPUs. If
routers were designed around commoditized components their COGm would be
lower. Of course, the router vendors would no longer be able to get the
premium prices for their boxen, either.
> What I wish I had finished @ Sprint: a web-based form that lets
> one arrange an exception to access-list 112 for some small fee,
> like $50/month/change. For your 50 bucks, you see no filtering
> on one of your long prefixes for a whole month (or year or whatever).
>
> These days it may be that your $50/month will make your
> long prefix less likely to be damped out of the routing table
> for a long time, however there is scope for further innovation,
> such as charging only $5 to clear your prefix out of the flap-damping
> penalty box of one router.
I, for one, would gladly pay for such a service. Provided that I don't have
to pay it to 32 ISPs per month.
