[98486] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: too many variables
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lincoln Dale)
Thu Aug 9 19:49:14 2007
From: "Lincoln Dale" <ltd@interlink.com.au>
To: <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com>, <ppml@arin.net>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:10:39 +1000
In-Reply-To: <20070809162137.GA1797@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> I asked this question to a couple of folks:
>
> "at the current churn rate/ration, at what size doe the FIB need to
> be before it will not converge?"
>
> and got these answers:
>
> --------- jabber log ---------
> a fine question, has been asked many times, and afaik noone has
> provided any empirically grounded answer.
>
> a few realities hinder our ability to answer this question.
>
> (1) there are technology factors we can't predict, e.g.,
> moore's law effects on hardware development
Moore's Law is only half of the equation. It is the part that deals with route
churn & the rate at which those can be processed (both peer notification and
control-plane programming data-plane in the form of FIB changes).
Moore's Law almost has zero relevance to FIB sizes. It doesn't map to growth in
SRAM or innovations/mechanisms for how to reduce the requirements for SRAM
while growing FIB sizes.
cheers,
lincoln.
