nanog mailing list archives
Re: virtual aggregation in IETF
From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs () seastrom com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:35:48 -0400
Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> writes:
That said I think you're headed to high end again. It has been routinetly posited that fib growth hurts the people on the edge more than in the center. I don't buy that for the reason outlined in my original response. If my pps requirements are moderate my software router can carry a fib of effectively arbitrary size at a lower cost than carrying the same fib in cam.
While that's true, planned obsolescence in terms of ram non-expandability from certain <cough> vendors leaves people on the edge (who often have to scrape by on thin budgets) hurting badly enough as to offset any theoretical software-vs-hardware router advantage they may have originally had. -r
Current thread:
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF, (continued)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Alain Durand (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Joel Jaeggli (Jul 20)
- RE: virtual aggregation in IETF Paul Francis (Jul 21)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Adrian Chadd (Jul 20)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Robert E. Seastrom (Jul 21)
- Re: virtual aggregation in IETF Alain Durand (Jul 20)