By doing "converge first verify later", the router can be made cheaper.
However, there is still the cost of the RPKI and the cost of running/maintaining it. My guess is that will bury the cost of the routers. Just a guess, Randy. -- Jakob Heitz. On Sep 9, 2011, at 9:22 AM, "Russ White" <ru...@riw.us> wrote: > On 9/9/2011 12:19 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >>>> as a vendor friend says, if ipv6 deploys, insha allah, we're gonna >>>> be upgrading those routers to do real v6 forwarding. if it does not >>>> deploy, you will be deploying massively bigger boxes to nat your ass >>>> into hell. >>> >>> There are two possible results, it seems to me: >>> >>> 1. The cost of deploying IPv6 will "bury" the cost of doing BGPsec, so >>> that BGPsec essentially becomes "free" in the IPv6 upgrade. >>> >>> 2. The cost of deploying BGPsec will be significant enough that it can't >>> be "buried," in any other costs. >>> >>> The question is --which is true? >> >> as i have no data, any guess i make would be bullshit, would it not? > > Does anyone have the data needed to answer which is true? My guess is > based on the cost of hardware in general --even small hardware costs > don't normally end up being "swamped"-- and the cost of network > convergence times, etc. > > Using different assumptions, you can come to different conclusions. I > don't know how you can build a study that would tell you which set of > assumptions is "correct." > > OTOH, it would be interesting to try. > > Russ > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > sidr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
