On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, Tony Li wrote:
The operational community needs to reach consensus on what its priorities are. We fought the CIDR wars to keep the routing subsystem working and the operational community were the primary backers of that. To not support scalable multihoming is to reverse that position entirely.
CIDR didn't have the big disadvantages to operators (at least non that I can identify, not having personally lived thru the CIDR migration).
No. It had big disadvantages to the end users. We asked them to suck it up in the name of having a scalable Internet. Now that we are proposing a technology to continue to help the providers scale, but that has disadvantages to the providers, we're seeing that the providers are not willing to sacrifice. Extremely disappointing.
I don't want to speak for Daniel, nor other operators really, but a solution that doesn't allow an operator to traffic engineer internally or externally is just not workable. For the same reasons quoted in your other messages to me: "Increased reliance on the Internet" If the network isn't reliable due to suboptimal routing issues it can't survive :(
condemning the result. The provider community has been well served by the IETF over the years and shim6 deserves at least a full and reasoned hearing before you throw the baby out with the bath-water.
agreed, but it doesn't seem that, until recently atleast, there was much operator participation. Hopefully that's changing for the better :)