> From: <[email protected]>
> Can the scalability issue be solved without any firm policy on the use
> provider independent prefixes/addresses?
That's the $64B question....
Isn't that accomplished by eliminating the scalability issue without depending
on/using A N Y S I N G L E (Unicast) address-prefix ?
> To what extent a loc/id solution can mitigate/solve the routing
> scalability issue?
I don't think location/identity separation _in and of itself_ solves the
routing scalability issue (e.g. if everyone goes out and does PI anyway), but
it is to many of us a _necessary precusor_ - i.e. once you have it then you
can do the _other things_ that are needed to solve routing scalability,
things that are just too painful without location/identity separation.
I could easily agree to hailing loc/id-split while taking the view that my
TARA-locator fits in here,too.
However, I don't. It would only increase the confusion.It is already bad
enough that people think having a solution that is called " loc/id-split
solution" is already
a property that makes it outstanding. Terminology is only noise and smoke
(Goethe :-)
Heiner
Noel
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
