RE: [GLOBAL-V6] Comments on AP Consensus

["Craig A. Huegen" <chuegen@cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gert Doering [mailto:gert@Space.Net] 
>
> Like "Cisco EU is connected to UUnet 702 and uses a /18 from their PA 
> space.  Cisco US is connected to Genuity and uses a /17 from 
> *their* PA space, etc., and all the PA blocks are only 
> announced to all the 
> direct upstreams (and internally, of course), but not to 'the 
> world'".  
> 
> I'm not sure how feasible this would be for any specific 
> network, but the 
> whole thing of artificially generating more and more and more routes 
> bothers me.

It bothers me as well, but doesn't bother me as much as having to
operate an end-user network that has to manage tens of /48's from
various top-tier roots globally, and the (IMO) horribly broken scheme
whereby the originating TCP host gets to pick the routes, and the very
complicated and _expensive_ process of adding or removing a provider's
prefix from an entire global infrastructure when providers change.  I
would much rather see an average of 2 prefixes per today's active,
multi-homed AS count before I'd sign up for those methods.

/cah


-
- This list (global-v6) is handled by majordomo@lists.apnic.net