[98480] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: too many variables
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lucy Lynch)
Thu Aug 9 17:58:44 2007
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 14:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lucy Lynch <llynch@civil-tongue.net>
To: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <3557C008-E638-40F5-899E-FA68B2FFFD62@blighty.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Steve Atkins wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Yes a very big unless. Multi-core processors are already available that
>> would make very large BGP convergence possible. Change the algorithm as
>> well and perhaps add some multi-threading to it and it's even better.
>
> Anyone have a decent pointer to something that covers the
> current state of the art in algorithms and (silicon) router
> architecture, and maybe an analysis that shows the reasoning
> to get from those to realistic estimates of routing table size limits?
no, not exactly - but take a look at:
Report from the IAB Workshop on Routing and Addressing
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-raws-report
Routing Research Group Active Proposals
http://www3.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/wiki/RoutingResearchGroup
On Compact Routing for the Internet
http://www.caida.org/publications/papers/2007/compact_routing/compact_routing.pdf
- Lucy
> Cheers,
> Steve
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Leigh Porter
>>
>>
>> Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 9, 2007, at 12:21 PM, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> so putting a stake in the ground, BGP will stop working @ around
>>>> 2,500,000 routes - can't converge... regardless of IPv4 or IPv6.
>>>> unless the CPU's change or the convergence algorithm changes.
>>>
>>> That is a pretty big "unless" .
>>>
>>> Cordially
>>>
>>> Patrick Giagnocavo
>>> patrick@zill.net
>>>
>
