I plan to write a critique of Chrisitan's Name Based Sockets proposal. I haven't read much of it yet, but my impression is that it is a good approach, in many ways, if one accepts that major changes to the stack, API and all applications are both possible and desirable and if one accepts that the network should be simple and the hosts should do more routing and addressing work than they do today.
I don't agree with these widely held points of view - because I think the outcomes from the best core-edge separation schemes will be better, with hosts not being required to do more than they do today. Whether or not Name Based Sockets is a core-edge elimination scheme or not, I am not sure. I will write a critique of it and see whether my concerns about extra host work and delays apply to it. I will do this ASAP after writing about LISP and TIDR and after responding on-list to a detailed set of comments I have just received on the new Ivip-arch ID. I will post it to the list so other people can comment on it and write their own critiques. I could coordinate final text for the critique of these three proposals, but I think who coordinates the text should be decided by whoever wants to contribute to such critiques. - Robin _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
