[rrg] Small v Large networks - 1 solution for both, 2 separate solutions etc.

[Eliot Lear]

Bill:

> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Eliot Lear<lear at cisco.com>  wrote:
>    
>> To put it another way,
>> home and SMB networks really don't even have an option today to be
>> multihomed (at least not at the network layer),
>>      
>
> Not correct. Anyone buying at least two T1s @ $600/mo or so each
> qualifies for a /24 for multihoming from one of the ISPs and an AS#
> from ARIN.

They're going from $25 - $90 or so single homed (what most pay) to $1200 
multihomed plus a BGP capable router plus the cost of the ASN, and 
that's only for failover.  If you want to actually make use of optimal 
routing, how much will that router cost?  But all of that is NOTHING in 
comparison to the costs of the expertise needed to manage such a service.

All of this having been said:

> My point is: if we solve the problem for small offices without
> disrupting or removing BGP, we'll at least minimally have an
> intermediate solution where BGP growth can be constrained by moving
> the dividing line between what size network is large enough to
> announce into BGP and what has to use the new solution.
>    

Who said anything about removing BGP?  Certainly not me.  Not sure what 
you mean by "disrupting."

Eliot