> Noel Chiappa wrote: > If you think there aren't still stability issues, why don't > you try getting rid of all the BGP dampening stuff, then? > Have any major ISP's out there done that? Dampening is part of the protocol and has nothing to do with the speed of light. Removing it is akin to removing packet re-ordering in TCP; nobody with half a brain would consider it. Same as packets arriving out of sequence, stability issues are part of life for someone who actually operates a network. Code has bugs, hardware fails, power goes bezerk, UPS batteries leak, rodents chew on cables, backhoes cut fiber, fat fingers screw up configs, and rookies flap routes because they know everything about astrophysics and nothing about running a production network. That's what dampening is for. > Stephen Sprunk wrote: > Of course, they don't actually enforce this unless a user's > upstream bandwidth usage consistently exceeds total POP > upstream bandwidth divided by the number of users at the POP > (in my case, about 300kB/s). Go above that and you get an email > asking you to turn down the speed on your P2P client ;-) Some bigger ISPs (with large POPs) prefer to limit the upstream so they don't have to manage quotas/bandwidth. I have 512kb upstream; it's not big but I can bittorrent all of it all day long, they don't care and probably don't know. > Alas, I've been unable to find a consumer-grade router that > will run native IPv6, 6to4, or even pass through IPinIP There's no market for it. Consumers don't know what it is and geeks already have a hack or an el-cheapo-ebay Cisco. Heck, my home router is a 7204 why would I go for a Linksys :-D Michel. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf