[43310] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: sub-basement multihoming (Re: Verio Peering Question)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Wed Oct 3 19:59:22 2001
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 16:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@exigengroup.com>
To: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0110031451250.6375-100000@www.everquick.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110031648190.19274-100000@arch.exigengroup.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, E.B. Dreger wrote:
> > Meanwhile, the problem is that the demand to do fancy routing
> > things outstrips the Internet's current collective ability
> > to supply it. As a result, we have to say "no" (or more $ than
> > you can afford) to alot of things that seem worthwhile. One of
>
> Yes. Put bluntly, technology is not serving its users. It's the
> oil-burning '73 Nova that won't die: far from ideal, but it
> still runs, so we may as well use it instead of buying a new
> car...
I would really love to hear if anyone invented a way to do global routing
with anything better than combination of flooding of aggregated
reacheability information and defaut routes.
It is not technology per se, it's the underlying concept which is barely
adequate.
--vadim
PS I too have a pair of diverse DSLs and use combination of DNS
(for ingress) and hash-based load sharing (for egress) packet
routing. The resulting paths are sometimes hugely far from
optimal.
