|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <038c01c58315$2a414680$6401a8c0@alexh> Cc: NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu> From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 19:18:08 +0200 To: "Alexei Roudnev" <alex@relcom.net> Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu On 7-jul-2005, at 18:58, Alexei Roudnev wrote: > Is RT of 1,000,000 routes BIG? We've had this discussion very many times. Both the maximum number of routes routers can hold at any time in the future and the number of prefixes people are going to inject at that time are unknown. This makes it impossible to guarantee that the former is higher than the latter. > Compare with SSL (works out-of-the-box in 99.999% cases, > and allows both, full and hard security with root certificates etc, or > simple security based on _ok, I trust you first time, then we can > work_. If I'm on the same shared medium as you I can kill your SSL session with one packet. > IPv4 was strong because it was designed by practical people and not > so much > by commiteets., IPv6 was designed by commiteets mainly. Do you > know, that > 'camel is horse designed by commiteet'? So when is the last time you sent an ICMP source quench? Or set any of the low delay / high reliability / high throughput bits in the IP header? > ----- Original Message ----- What am I, your janitor? Can't you throw your garbage in the trashcan?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |