On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Robin Whittle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't support the scaling problem being solved just for "small" networks, > however defined,
Agree. > differently for "small" and "large" networks. Disagree. There's a money issue here: large networks can afford and are willing to spend more money on multihoming than small networks. There's no reason that both should be constrained to the same solution at the same cost. The requirement is that whatever the scaling solution, the per-network cost must either be trivial -or- recoverable from the networks who instigate it. BGP is unacceptable because it costs "the world" about $8000/yr for every announced BGP prefix. If there was a way that "the world" could recover that $8000 from each of the folks announcing a prefix, our problem space would shrink considerably. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
