Subject: [rrg] Neglected RIB growth consideration

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 06:11:13 EST

All submitted mainstream proposals are DV-based, i.e. have to maintain  
RIBs. From the newest discussion I have learned: None of them has  considered 
that the growing number of paths is also and even a  more severe scalability 
problem than the FIB growth. None of them does  offer any solution, and 
indeed, I think, any restriction wouldn't be good (like  controlling by 
pricing).   
 
TARA isn't based on DV, i.e. it doesn't need a classical FIB (instead some  
alternative tables) and no RIB at all. Instead of a RIB, some  
zoom-topologies of the internet need to be maintained. Without any costs,  an  
astronomically greater number of routes can be provisioned  hereby.
 
Hence TARA is the only solution that has addressed the RIB growth issue  
(-implicitly, i.e. by no extra doing). I cannot see how any of the mainstream  
proposals will deal with this issue.
 
Heiner