On Thu, Apr 06, 2000, Dustin Goodwin wrote:
Well from sentiment I pick up from nanog lists and last nanog meeting it does not seem many provides are actually worried about the size of the internet routing table anymore. Use to be the main objection to routing table growth was the fear of core routers become expensive space heaters . I am inferring here that routers have caught up and then some handling larger and larger tables. So why is there still so much resistances to supporting multi-homed customers that, shock horror, involves providers advertising more discreet routes that are in the middle of their cider blocks? I am guessing administrative overhead is main objection now. The whole micro-allocation conversation show provider willingness to allow growth in the routing tables. I have my flame retardant suit on so go for it.
Just because people might not fear their routers melting under large network tables doesn't mean tomorrow they want 100,000 /30's in their routing tables. The resistance is there so people who really positively have no other choice - there are lots of other possibilities, and if some unexpected sideeffect of lots of /30's pop up, the entire internet suffers rather than just one customer. Adrian