On 3/20/2013 9:25 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I don't know a single ISP that wants to throttle growth by not accepting
additional customers, BGP speaking or not. (I do know several that want to
throttle growth through not upgrading their links because they have a captive
audience they are trying to ransom. But that is neither relevant to this
discussion, not controversial - unless you are paid by one of those ISPs….)
Comcast
Verizon
AT&T
Time Warner Cable
Cox
CenturyLink
to name a few.
Not one of them will run BGP with a residential subscriber.
And please don't reply with "then why can't I run BGP on my [cable|DSL|etc.]
link?" Broadband providers are not trying to throttle growth by not allowing grandma
to do BGP, and swapping to LISP or anything else won't change that.
Sure they are. If they weren't, it would be relatively straight forward to add
the necessary options to DHCP for a minimal (accept default, advertise local)
BGP configuration and it would be quite simple for CPE router manufacturers to
incorporate those capabilities.
The problem is BGP doesn't scale to that level and everyone knows it, so, we
limit growth by not allowing it to be a possibility.
Is someone working on 8-byte ASNs yet?
