[41069] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What is the limit? (was RE: multi-homing fixes)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean M. Doran)
Wed Aug 29 11:06:12 2001
To: bicknell@ufp.org, smd@clock.org
Cc: cmartin@gnilink.net, nanog@merit.edu
Message-Id: <20010829150551.2AB25C7911@cesium.clock.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: smd@clock.org (Sean M. Doran)
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Leo -
Draw two curves, the first y=x/2, the second y=x^2
Move the value of x for y=1 for the first curve left by 2, 5 or 10
and it will still be surpassed by the second curve.
You will even see this for a second curve of y=x*2 or y=x.
The global routing table size HAS grown exponentially
in the past. Rationalize it any way you want, blame whatever
you like, but there is no known way to construct a router that
can handle that kind of growth in anything but a short term,
and the trend for the components in the router growth curve
is simply not going to increase to a long term superlinear rate.
A 10x system performance boost today just moves the x point for
y=1 of fundamental curve claimed by Moore's Law to the left
a few notches. Or are you claiming that routing equipment
will have a fundamentally different, and larger, growth curve
than other computing systems? (I think there is a basis for
claiming that there are some reasons which would support a
_shallower_ growth curve for routing equipment, actually).
In short: are you claiming that the caeteris paribus assumption
in comparing Moore's Law to global routing table size is clearly false?
It would be nice to see even a partial proof of such a claim.
From anyone.
Sean. (today's insult-free posting)
