Why Should I Care That Fully Meshed Peering Leads to Exponential Growth of Total Connections?
Can I cast Death Ward on additional creatures without causing previous castings to end?
Job interview by video at home and privacy concerns
MaxCounters solution in C# from Codility
Caro-Kann c4-c5 push
How is this situation not a checkmate?
How to level a picture frame hung on a single nail?
Giving a good fancy look to a simple table
Is the "spacetime" the same thing as the mathematical 4th dimension?
Could the Queen overturn the UK Supreme Court ruling regarding prorogation of Parliament?
Lighthouse Alternatives
Is there a pattern for handling conflicting function parameters?
Why does `FindFit` fail so badly in this simple case?
Replace zeros in a list with last nonzero value
What are one's options when facing religious discrimination at the airport?
Why does it seem the best way to make a living is to invest in real estate?
How to "Start as close to the end as possible", and why to do so?
What does a textbook look like while you are writing it?
Disable all sound permanently
Meaning of "fin" in "fin dai tempi"
Would an object shot from earth fall into the sun?
How dangerous are my worn rims?
What does the triangle look like in this diagram?
Did Tolkien ever write about a Heaven or Hell for Men?
Does the US Armed Forces refuse to recruit anyone with an IQ less than 83?
Why Should I Care That Fully Meshed Peering Leads to Exponential Growth of Total Connections?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
It seems that when I see a description of a fully-meshed peering system, the exponential growth of peer connections is often referred to as a negative.
However, some mentions of this were specifically towards fully meshed peering in an AWS VPC specifically.
Surely, if connections between peers is done entirely automatically, and the amount of connections for any individual VPC increases linearly, then this shouldn't be an issue?
cloud
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment
|
It seems that when I see a description of a fully-meshed peering system, the exponential growth of peer connections is often referred to as a negative.
However, some mentions of this were specifically towards fully meshed peering in an AWS VPC specifically.
Surely, if connections between peers is done entirely automatically, and the amount of connections for any individual VPC increases linearly, then this shouldn't be an issue?
cloud
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
It seems that when I see a description of a fully-meshed peering system, the exponential growth of peer connections is often referred to as a negative.
However, some mentions of this were specifically towards fully meshed peering in an AWS VPC specifically.
Surely, if connections between peers is done entirely automatically, and the amount of connections for any individual VPC increases linearly, then this shouldn't be an issue?
cloud
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It seems that when I see a description of a fully-meshed peering system, the exponential growth of peer connections is often referred to as a negative.
However, some mentions of this were specifically towards fully meshed peering in an AWS VPC specifically.
Surely, if connections between peers is done entirely automatically, and the amount of connections for any individual VPC increases linearly, then this shouldn't be an issue?
cloud
cloud
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
RecyclingBenRecyclingBen
182 bronze badges
182 bronze badges
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
RecyclingBen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
By exponentially increasing the the number of connections, you also exponentially increase the amount of control traffic, and you could end up with the control traffic using most or all of the available bandwidth of the system.
Some protocols will have mitigations for this behavior. For example, OSPF uses the DR/BDR to break the exponential number of connections, and iBGP can use route reflectors or confederations to do something similar.
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
add a comment
|
In addition to Ron’s point about the amount of control traffic: The additional cpu load resulting from processing route updates on every router often isn’t worth it either when your network grows. You don’t want every router in your network to do that, that’s where for example route reflectors come in. Having many routers processing route updates can lead to nasty routing inconsistencies if not all routers process updates equally fast.
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "496"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
RecyclingBen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62692%2fwhy-should-i-care-that-fully-meshed-peering-leads-to-exponential-growth-of-total%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
By exponentially increasing the the number of connections, you also exponentially increase the amount of control traffic, and you could end up with the control traffic using most or all of the available bandwidth of the system.
Some protocols will have mitigations for this behavior. For example, OSPF uses the DR/BDR to break the exponential number of connections, and iBGP can use route reflectors or confederations to do something similar.
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
add a comment
|
By exponentially increasing the the number of connections, you also exponentially increase the amount of control traffic, and you could end up with the control traffic using most or all of the available bandwidth of the system.
Some protocols will have mitigations for this behavior. For example, OSPF uses the DR/BDR to break the exponential number of connections, and iBGP can use route reflectors or confederations to do something similar.
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
add a comment
|
By exponentially increasing the the number of connections, you also exponentially increase the amount of control traffic, and you could end up with the control traffic using most or all of the available bandwidth of the system.
Some protocols will have mitigations for this behavior. For example, OSPF uses the DR/BDR to break the exponential number of connections, and iBGP can use route reflectors or confederations to do something similar.
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
By exponentially increasing the the number of connections, you also exponentially increase the amount of control traffic, and you could end up with the control traffic using most or all of the available bandwidth of the system.
Some protocols will have mitigations for this behavior. For example, OSPF uses the DR/BDR to break the exponential number of connections, and iBGP can use route reflectors or confederations to do something similar.
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Ron Maupin♦Ron Maupin
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
73.3k14 gold badges75 silver badges136 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
In addition to Ron’s point about the amount of control traffic: The additional cpu load resulting from processing route updates on every router often isn’t worth it either when your network grows. You don’t want every router in your network to do that, that’s where for example route reflectors come in. Having many routers processing route updates can lead to nasty routing inconsistencies if not all routers process updates equally fast.
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
add a comment
|
In addition to Ron’s point about the amount of control traffic: The additional cpu load resulting from processing route updates on every router often isn’t worth it either when your network grows. You don’t want every router in your network to do that, that’s where for example route reflectors come in. Having many routers processing route updates can lead to nasty routing inconsistencies if not all routers process updates equally fast.
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
add a comment
|
In addition to Ron’s point about the amount of control traffic: The additional cpu load resulting from processing route updates on every router often isn’t worth it either when your network grows. You don’t want every router in your network to do that, that’s where for example route reflectors come in. Having many routers processing route updates can lead to nasty routing inconsistencies if not all routers process updates equally fast.
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
In addition to Ron’s point about the amount of control traffic: The additional cpu load resulting from processing route updates on every router often isn’t worth it either when your network grows. You don’t want every router in your network to do that, that’s where for example route reflectors come in. Having many routers processing route updates can lead to nasty routing inconsistencies if not all routers process updates equally fast.
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
Teun Vink♦Teun Vink
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
12.7k5 gold badges35 silver badges58 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
RecyclingBen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
RecyclingBen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
RecyclingBen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
RecyclingBen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62692%2fwhy-should-i-care-that-fully-meshed-peering-leads-to-exponential-growth-of-total%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Do you have a specific problem?
– Zac67
8 hours ago
@Zac67 I am considering using a fully meshed set of VPCs for a specific project I'm working on, and I'm not sure why having a large amount of connections is bad per se, when everything can be scaled automatically. (Sorry if I'm using incorrect terminology, I'm not a networking guy).
– RecyclingBen
8 hours ago