nanog mailing list archives
RE: [ppml] too many variables
From: <michael.dillon () bt com>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 18:29:13 +0100
And yet people still say the sky is falling with respect to routing convergence and FIB size. Probably a better comparison BTW, would be with a
Actually, the better comparison is with the power of current processors used in Juniper and Cisco gear with the current Moore's law power of common off-the-shelf PC processors. Then go back to the point in time when there were real actual issues with FIB size on routers, and look at the same relative power. Today, is there a bigger or a smaller gap than way back when there were real problems on the net. If the gap is bigger or the same, then we are nuts to worry about it. If the gap is significantly smaller then we should get some serious researchers to figure out the real limits of current technology and the future technology at the point where the gap has gone to zero. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: [ppml] too many variables, (continued)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Leo Bicknell (Aug 14)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Adrian Chadd (Aug 14)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables sthaug (Aug 14)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Bruce M Simpson (Aug 24)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Paul Vixie (Aug 10)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables vijay gill (Aug 10)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Paul Vixie (Aug 10)
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Steven M. Bellovin (Aug 10)
- Message not available
- Re: [ppml] too many variables Joel Jaeggli (Aug 13)
- Message not available
- Re: [ppml] too many variables vijay gill (Aug 10)
- Message not available
- RE: [ppml] too many variables michael.dillon (Aug 12)