> -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Joel M. > Halpern > 发送时间: 2009年12月27日 3:40 > 收件人: Brian E Carpenter > 抄送: [email protected]; wei zhang > 主题: Re: [rrg] Aggregatable EIDs > > Two points of clarification: > 1) EIDs need to be aggregatable only if they are used as look up keys. > If they are never the key for a lookup (and some proposals have that > property) then aggregatability is a non-issue. > 2) The corollary to 1 is that EIDs only need to be aggregatable in the > structure in which they are looked up. If they are looked up in the > routing system, then they need to be topological. If they are looked up > in something else, then they need to right structure for that something > else. If the EID is a DNS name, then the DNS structure defines its > aggregatability. If it is looked up in a binary delegation tree, then > that defines the structure. If they are looked up in a DHT, and we are > prepared to mandate a DHT, then again they don't need aggregation > properties. > 2') It is very likely that EIDs will have at least delegation oriented > aggregation, unless we resort to random EID creation.
I fully agree to the above clarification! Then the question is: among the delegation oriented aggregation and the random creation, which one is the better choice for EIDs? Or do we need a third option, a compromise between these two options, e.g., one part of the EID is delegation-oriented aggregatable, while the other part is randomly created? Xiaohu _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
