The point is very simple - virtual circuit routing does not scale. That was beaten to death in ATM vs IP discussions years ago. Do we need to repeat that again? http://www.kotovnik.com/~avg/pluris/ip_vs_atm/ --vadim On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Christian Kuhtz wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 03:34:05PM +0100, Randy Bush wrote:
A PE carries only the routes needed at a specific PE depending on the VPNs present at a specific PE.
and five years out, what percentage of my O(10-^6) vpn customers will have a branch in each of (chicago|nyc|sf|.*)?
Randy,
and how should I know? ;-).. I'm a) lacking a functional crystal ball (a magic 8 ball is my only ball shaped engineering tool) and b) they'll presumably be still your customers and not mine! ;-)
Seriously, what point are you trying to make? There are several ways to interpret the statement.
Thanks, Chris
-- Christian Kuhtz <ck@arch.bellsouth.net> -wk, <ck@gnu.org> -hm Sr. Architect, Engineering & Architecture, BellSouth.net, Atlanta, GA, U.S. "I speak for myself only."