I have seen lot of comments and debate for Prop.100 and from
some of the comments , it is clear some of the members are not clear about the
very purpose of the proposal , so it is requested to all to kindly go through
our original proposal and clarifications issued on 17/8/2011 then it will be
clear to them that this proposal is not talking only of some specific countries,
but taking care of all economies in the APNIC Region, as we have said in our
original proposal that country wise Address block can be allocated to NIRs( For
those economies those who are having NIR) and further allocation to Different
organizations can be done by the NIR and of course through APNIC, keeping alignment
with APNIC policy and for non NIR countries this big block can be reserved in
APNIC secretariat and allocations to different organizations in that country
can be done out of this big block.
In this process all economies will be taken
care of and will not be left out like in case of IPv4 era, while maintaining
the control of RIRs ,This was the theme of the whole proposal . Many of the
reputed members started discussions on the technicalities of the advantages, as
quoted in the proposal and opposed the proposal on these grounds , It is suggested
to all APNIC community members to see the theme and spirit of the proposal as
explained above and work towards overall interest of all countries and
organizations in APNIC region.
Regards
R M AGARWAL
DDG (NT),
Department of Telecommunications,
Room no. 1104, Sanchar Bhawan
20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi - 110001
Mob: +91- 9868133440
Off no. +91 11 23372606
.
From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
[mailto:sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Naresh Ajwani Sent: 22 August 2011 12:02 To: ramesh.chandra at airtel dot in Cc: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Fw: Pro-100:National IP Address Plan -
Allocation of country-wide IP address blocks
And
More so, next hop address tracking is in the transition
stage and not the ecosystem. The prop 100 is for NIRs and shud be debated
in accordance only.
>You're probably referring to Cisco's
early BGP >implementation in IOS where the BGP Scanner process ran >every 60 seconds (although it could be tuned to run at much >shorter intervals). > >Software has come a very long way since then, Ramesh, and >IOS, in particular, has benefited quite a bit. Gone is the >BGP Scanner, which has since been replaced by Next Hop >Address Tracking. Next Hop Address Tracking has also been >superseded by PIC (Prefix Independent Convergence). > >All these improvements in software have meant convergence >times for BGP have improved greatly, and the 60-second >crunch routers have to do is no longer necessary provided >they are running the software that supports these new >features.
Hi Mark,
agree, there is lot of improvement in SW coding. Cisco has also improved
in XOR release. However, number of routers running XOR is very low. Cisco as
market leader runs same process in IOS used in most of routers at present. Same
is with other vendors and impact possibly may be different. There is no
intention of summarizing routers available in different AS.
regards
Ramesh Chandra | GM – Network Engineering | NSG | Bharti Airtel Limited |
Phone# +91 124 4243897, 9810300704 -----
Forwarded by Ramesh Chandra/India/Airtel on 08/22/2011 10:56 AM -----
> Appreciate your query and let us look at simple > Engineering example for a Enterprise house. One > Enterprise customer manage 10 IP pools allocated to him > as per his business demand in previous years. He is > announcing these 10 routes in BGP to upstream carriers, > NAP/NIXI and other private peering he has with others. > Every connected BGP listner has to process every 60 > seconds these 10 routes and install in routing table and > this continues to thousands of routers in Internet.
You're probably referring to Cisco's early BGP implementation in IOS where the BGP Scanner process ran every 60 seconds (although it could be tuned to run at much shorter intervals).
Software has come a very long way since then, Ramesh, and IOS, in particular, has benefited quite a bit. Gone is the BGP Scanner, which has since been replaced by Next Hop Address Tracking. Next Hop Address Tracking has also been superseded by PIC (Prefix Independent Convergence).
All these improvements in software have meant convergence times for BGP have improved greatly, and the 60-second crunch routers have to do is no longer necessary provided they are running the software that supports these new features.
> If these 10 pools become one continuous block then these > thousands of routers shall scan and install one route > instead 10 routes in previous case under that AS. This > helps to reduce few CPU cycles and these CPU cycles > become significant when we talk thousand routers > repeating the same.
Unless you're talking about route crunching within a single AS, I'd be more concerned about one router processing thousands of routes, as opposed to a thousand routers - each in a different AS - processing a handful of routes.
> Lesser routes in BGP required less > time to install and hence faster Convergence time. > Presently, convergence time for 10k IPv4/Ipv6 routes > takes approx 1 second. Convergence time shall reduce > significantly when everyone summarise their own routes > before announcing.
Agree, but do you think it is feasible that an entire country, made up of several ISP's, can announce a single IPv6 allocation to the Internet? Serious question.
Mark.
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure,dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this
email or any action taken in reliance on this e-mail is strictly prohibited and
may be unlawful. The recipient acknowledges that Bharti Airtel Limited or its
subsidiaries and associated companies(collectively "Bharti Airtel
Limited"),are unable to exercise control or ensure or guarantee the
integrity of/overthe contents of the information contained in e-mail
transmissions and further acknowledges that any views expressed in this message
are those of the individual sender and no binding nature of the message shall
be implied or assumed unless the sender does so expressly with due authority of
Bharti Airtel Limited. Before opening any attachments please check them for
viruses and defects.