Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-rs-bfd-00 (3/2/2015 to 3/16/2015)
Thomas King <thomas.king@de-cix.net> Wed, 18 March 2015 18:54 UTC
Return-Path: <thomas.king@de-cix.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8461A878E; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dc0LGMawD6MD; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from de-cix.net (relay3.de-cix.net [IPv6:2a02:c50:0:1e::3:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55D6C1A8822; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.11,423,1422918000"; d="p7s'?scan'208"; a="1627510"
Received: from ms-exchange.de-cix.net ([192.168.67.12]) by mailgw011.de-cix.net with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 18 Mar 2015 19:54:24 +0100
Received: from MS-Exchange.de-cix.net ([fe80::250:56ff:fe9e:3eea]) by MS-Exchange.de-cix.net ([fe80::250:56ff:fe9e:3eea%10]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 19:54:24 +0100
From: Thomas King <thomas.king@de-cix.net>
To: Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-rs-bfd-00 (3/2/2015 to 3/16/2015)
Thread-Index: AQHQX2KQloKaLrJPrEOg21NQaaXf050evpWAgAPLxgA=
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 18:54:22 +0000
Message-ID: <6BBC5C04-0D9A-4B6C-ADC3-AC4D6A37E193@de-cix.net>
References: <7BDA4F61-AF6C-4B56-AFC8-D5CC2B9E7A96@cisco.com> <55069AAF.2050801@exa-networks.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <55069AAF.2050801@exa-networks.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.140.93]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0EDA3047-529E-4305-9F7F-2C716697CEB9"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/yhoTXN9EGKjYid95FdRoUa25wVk>
Cc: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "idr-bounces@ietf.org" <idr-bounces@ietf.org>, David Freedman <david.freedman@uk.clara.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-rs-bfd-00 (3/2/2015 to 3/16/2015)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 18:54:29 -0000
Hi Thomas > On 16 Mar 2015, at 09:56, Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk> wrote: > > Many networks will not use Route Servers due to this problem which did > hit quite a few operators over the years on large internet exchanges. > This is a reason why some large operators refuse to peer with smaller > ones via RS. I think this is not correct anymore: http://net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de/~prichter/imc238-richterA.pdf Nearly all customers at DE-CIX Frankfurt use the route servers. I think many things happened in the past to make sure route servers run stable and reliable. With our proposal we are pushing hard in this direction. Especially, for large IXPs such as DE-CIX, AMS-IX, Linx or Netnod setting up bilateral peerings does not scale anymore (who wants to maintain 500+ BGP sessions?). Route servers are the only solution to keep the setup process manageable (from my point of view). Best regards, Thomas
- [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-… Jerome Durand (jerduran)
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Randy Bush
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… David Freedman
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Randy Bush
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… David Freedman
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Thomas Mangin
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Randy Bush
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… David Freedman
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Jerome Durand (jerduran)
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Thomas King
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Neil J. McRae
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Susan Hares
- [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Jon Nistor
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Simpson, Adam (Adam)
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… suprita
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Rabadan, Jorge (Jorge)
- [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-idr-… splug
- Re: [Idr] 2 Week WG Adoption call for draft-ymbk-… Matthias Waehlisch