Excerpts from Noel Chiappa on Mon, Mar 30, 2009 12:27:18PM -0400: > However, for _non-flat_ routing, one needs a set of names with more > _structure_ in them, and it's names of that type (ones with built-in structure > which is related to the _location_ of the thing they are naming), which most > people mean when they say 'locator'.
> And clearly, one can't use the same term for both of these (quite > different) concepts, without great confusion... But where's the difference? This is where Dow's axes come in handy. The more structure there is in the name, the less work routing has to do. On one end of the spectrum you have a strict source route (or a circuit or a PIP "address"). On the other end you have MACs. It's all routing, it's all forwarding, it's all "locators" (meaning things used by forwarding), but there is a continuum of how much structure there is and how much work you have to do. So there is clearly a difference between a something that cannot be used by forwarding for any purpose and something that can, but within the group that can, structure is not a qualitative difference -- the alternatives are points along a dimension of how structured they are. Thank you Dow. Scott _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
