On 5-Mar-2006, at 14:16, Owen DeLong wrote:
It flies if you look at changing the routing paradigm instead of
pushing
routing decisions out of the routers and off to the hosts. Source
Routing
is a technology that most of the internet figured out is problematic
years ago. Making source routing more complicated and calling it
something
else doesn't make it less of a bad idea.
Calling shim6 source-routing when it's not in order to give it an
aura of evil is similarly unproductive :-)
I don't think it will be as expensive as you think to fix it. I
think if
we start working on a new routing paradigm today in order to
support IDR
based on AS PATH instead of Prefix, we would realistically see this in
deployable workable code within 3-5 years.
I'm confused by statements such as these.
Was it not the lack of any scalable routing solution after many years
of trying that led people to resort to endpoint mobility in end
systems, à la shim6?
Joe
