Re: [RAM] Number of DFZ routers

    > From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>

    > At the very least a new protocol would have to support the situation
    > where the new protocol is spoken in the middle and BGP both on the left
    > and on the right.

Right, and if the fundamental concepts of the new design are very different
from those of BGP (e.g. it exchages maps, rather than routing table entries),
that translation, forwards and backwards, could be rather tricky.

    > It gets even more interesting when two clouds speaking the new protocol
    > are separated by a BGP cloud.

Now you're either i) limiting the new system to having the capabilities of
BGP (in which case, you lose a lot of the point of doing something new), or
ii) you have to accept that two such discontiguous regions of New Stuff
simply don't get all the benefits of New Stuff until they somehow manage to
connect directly.

    > I don't think an internet-wide map based protocol is feasible

We will have to agree to differ... :-)

    > A system where there is a map of the "center" of the network (as seen
    > from a given vantage point) where mapping to/from prefix tables
    > happens at the edges of the map would be very interesting.

It happens that map-based system are ideally suited to building systems where
eveyone has a different view of the network...

	Noel

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram

Re: [RAM] Number of DFZ routers - radical improvement of BGP unlikely