Subject: Re: Re: [RRG] Renumbering...

From: "Heinrich Hummel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 17:59:18

31 Day BGP Profile: 30-July-2008 00:00 - 29-August-2008 23:59 (UTC+1000)
Number of BGP Update Messages: 4387614
Number of Prefix Updates: 5642288
Number of Prefix Withdrawals: 503877
Average Prefixes per BGP Update: 1.40
Average BGP Update Messages per second: 1.59
Average Prefix Updates per second: 2.22
Peak BGP Update Message Rate per second: 6308  (14:02:43 Fri, 22-Aug-2008)
Peak Prefix Update Rate per second: 3207  (18:36:01 Tue, 5-Aug-2008)
Peak Prefix Withdraw Rate per second: 15121  (14:03:18 Fri, 22-Aug-2008

How would these figures look like in case of a renumbering action ?!

Heiner

-------- Kabel E-Mail Reply ---------------
From: [email-masked]
To : [email-masked]
Date: 30.08.2008 02:10:54

Tony Li wrote:
> One of the topics that came up in Dublin during Lixia's talk was the
> acceptability of renumbering. How do folks feel about an architectural
> solution requiring renumbering to retain scalability?
> 

We _already_ have a scalable solution that requires end-sites to 
renumber: RFC 4192. The target market rolled their eyes and got the 
RIRs to change policy to allow PI assignments in IPv6, just like in 
IPv4, rather than even give it a try because the very concept was so 
unacceptable.

Can we please quit beating this horse?

S

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg