In einer eMail vom 27.11.2008 10:13:14 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Put another way: I see the strong appeal of a recursive architecture and I embrace that portion of the goal. However, all recursion starts with a base case, and it troubles me that the host cannot be an element of that base case. It implies that the base is flawed and has limitations in its functionality. Noel likes to say that the measure of an architecture is its ability to adapt to new requirements that are not yet forseen. What new requirements will arise in the base architecture where the fundamental lack of host participation will cripple us? I like all of this email - not just the above copy. Because my own concept starts out from a hierarchical topological network view I wouldn't have a fundamental size problem in case the hosts should also be part of the viewed topology (being stubs or non-stubs in case of multihoming). Nevertheless it takes some new thinking and some work to include the hosts/residential stub routers. Therefore my question: What are the reasons or why would it be favorable to include them in the topology ? I would be grateful to learn about these reasons. Heiner
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
