Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues

On 2008/07/07 14:07, Duane <[email protected]> wrote:
> Otmar Lendl wrote:
> 
> > We (including speermint) have been though that discussion already 
> > a few times. A BGP-like protocol for numbers (or better: prefixes)
> > just won't scale.
> 
> Why would DNS scale any better?
> 

Compare the # of domains out there with the number of routes in the
global BGP routing table. Roughly, there are 3 orders of magnitudes 
between the two.

> > The rest of the world doesn't care how this ISPs handed out addresses, a
> > single entry in the global routing table suffices.
> 
> Again, you are confusing things here between prefixes and routing, we're
> not talking about routing just prefix lengths, the rest of your comments
> are along the same line.

Think.

Who announces a length for a prefix? The carrier (or enterprise) who
operates the prefix. Given any leeway from the NRA, he is the only
one who definitly knows.

Any porting operation leads to someone to announce the length of the
number/prefix he just ported in. With open numbering plans, this ported
number does not need to have the same length as before.

Thus, taking open numbering plans into account, the size of the
BGP-like *whatever* table is O(#blocks + #ported numbers).

/ol
-- 
// Otmar Lendl <[email protected]>, T: +43 1 5056416 - 33, F: - 933
// nic.at Internet Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft m.b.H
// http://www.nic.at/  LG Salzburg, FN 172568b, Sitz: Salzburg