On 26 April 2017 at 00:27, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-omar-krp/ I like this idea, but I think it's sufficiently similar to the original aim of EGP/BGP that it's already been proven impractical, and moving to it would also be impractical. I am not a routing expert, so I'll cheerfully wait being shot down by others, but this is my rationale: The reason why we have large routing tables within BGP routers is mostly that ASNs now consist of many more prefixes than were originally expected, and so the prefixes do not aggregate well enough. This proposal involves, essentially, renumbering the entire internet (which is very difficult in practical terms), such that aggregation then works more efficiently. However, history has shown that while this would work for the short term, it would require continuous renumbering in response to many factors (new addresses, corporate mergers, etc) in order to maintain its efficiency. Since we have not solved renumbering very effectively in the first place, I feel that this is not worth working on. I would, however, suggest that addressing renumbering would be an excellent use of your time. A viable solution to renumbering large public networks would mean that the BGP table would shrink, by the same logic as above. That is, if we had a method for renumbering continuously, then it would improve the efficiency of BGP as well, to almost the same extent, without incurring the initial internet-wide renumbering effort. Finally, I would note that while routing tables are large, the internet still functions - this may not be the best use of your time therefore. Dave.