nanog mailing list archives
Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...)
From: Chris Adams <cmadams () hiwaay net>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:04:24 -0600
Once upon a time, Edward B. DREGER <eddy+public+spam () noc everquick net> said:
No, it is not unworkable. Think through it a bit more. Although the problem is theoretically O(N^2), in practice it is closer to O(N). Note that _routing itself_ is theoretically an O(N^2) problem. Do we say that it is "unworkable obviously"? No.
There's a difference: computers (routers) handle the O(N^2) routing problem, while people would have to handle the O(N^2) cooperative AS problem.
Yes, one ASN is required per cooperating pair. Just how many pairs do you think there are? Now compare with the number of leaves that [would [like to]] dual-home.
We are a relatively small ISP with just a handful of multihoming customers. However, no two of them have the same other provider. What is gained by us setting up relationships with a bunch of other providers and getting special ASes assigned? What if one of those customers gets a connection to a third upstream, or if they change their upstream? Right now, it doesn't affect us (we don't have to do anything), but in your setup, it would require us to get yet another AS. Only one of our multihoming customers has a connection to someone we already have a connection with, so there's no path between our network and the rest. -- Chris Adams <cmadams () hiwaay net> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
Current thread:
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need..., (continued)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Daniel Roesen (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Per Heldal (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Daniel Roesen (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Michael . Dillon (Feb 15)
- Re: protocols that don't meet the need... Alexei Roudnev (Feb 15)
- a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Paul Jakma (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Chris Adams (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Andre Oppermann (Feb 15)
- RE: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Ejay Hire (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Andre Oppermann (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 15)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) John Payne (Feb 16)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Edward B. DREGER (Feb 16)
- Re: a radical proposal (Re: protocols that don't meet the need...) Marshall Eubanks (Feb 15)