[84449] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Barak)
Tue Sep 13 14:25:00 2005
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Barak <thegameiam@yahoo.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0509110626220.21650@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--- Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> The "shimming" model is a way to solve this by the
> endsystems knowing
> about multihoming, instead of the network. I
> personally think this is a
> better idea and scales much better. Let's have the
> network moving packets
> as its primary goal, not solving "how do I reach
> this prefix" equations.
Waitaminute - isn't the whole *purpose* of layer 3
that the network makes these routing decisions?
If there are N routers in an ISP, I would expect the
ISP to connect to X endsystems, where 10N < X < 1000N.
How does knowing about X endsystems scale better than
knowing about N intermediate systems?
Am I missing something here?
David Barak
http://www.listentothefranchise.com
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
