On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:16:57 -0500, Owen DeLong said: > On Mar 20, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Seth Mattinen <se...@rollernet.us> wrote: > > Based on the average clue of your average residential subscriber (anyone > > here need not apply) I'd say that's a good thing.
> If BGP were plug-and-play automated with settings specified by the provider, > what would the user's clue level have to do with it? The hypothetical existence of such a box doesn't change the fact that providers have to make business decisions based on actual boxes and users. Yes, if a plug-n-play idiot-proof BGP box existed, then the profit calculus would be different. On the other hand, if there existed a reliable cost-effective means for faster-than-light signaling, if would drastically change intercontinental peering patterns. All the same, anybody who's planning their interconnects in 2013 reality and not looking at who has 40K km of underwater cable and who doesn't is in for a surprise....
pgpfyTVVObIH4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
