[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Geoff Huston]

There is pressure for consolidation in the existing markets, yes. At the 
same time I suspect that the level of provider care and attention to some 
of the common issues, including routing table size will decline due to the 
price pressures on the providers.  We saw in V4 that the most basic form of 
routing bloat pressure was from inattention to routing detail - these folk 
were in general not malicious - they were simply following the templates 
left by the original installers. This is certainly a more significant risk 
factor in an increasingly commoditized  provider environment. (Its not that 
they won't care, but they they'll find it harder to fund caring)

regards,

    Geoff




At 01:04 PM 24/01/2006, Bill Darte wrote:
>Geoff,
>I'm interested in knowing whether you think that the consolidation of
>providers in a global commodity market for vX bit pushing will impact the
>routing table 'bloat'.....assuming you think that consolidation is a logical
>consequence of the commodity of bit pushing....assuming you think bit
>pushing IS a commodity.
>Didn't mean to make a riddle out of this..
>
>Geoff said:
>Given that there are few natural constraints to routing table bloat
>other than an advanced state of social consciousness, the drivers for IPv6
>routing table bloat appear to include a vastly larger end device
>population and a commodity utility provider structure that cares little
>about spending time (and money) to take measures to avoid routing table
>expansion.
>That would appear to constitute grounds for thinking that, yes,
>there is a distinct risk of IPv6 route table bloat at levels greater
>than we've seen in IPv4.