On Thursday 03 June 2010 09:58:33 Lixia Zhang sent: > > On May 31, 2010, at 12:42 AM, Toni Stoev wrote: > > > On Monday 31 May 2010 at 08:07:45 Tony Li sent: > >> > >> On 5/23/10 3:49 PM, "Toni Stoev" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Dae Young, fellow researchers, > >>> > >>> Let me formulate two basic statements out of the recent discussion: > >>> > >>> 1. "Node" is the proper granularity unit for an intra-domain routing > >>> point. > >>> > >>> Presuming that inter-domain routing is based on routing domains as > >>> inter-domain routing points: > >>> > >>> 2. Inter-domain routing shall be based on intra-domain routing as a > >>> service. > >>> > >>> This allows for inter-domainly transparent intra-domain routing as well > >>> as for > >>> intra-domain traffic engineering. > >>> > >>> Do you agree with the statements? > >>> > >>> http://www.doodle.com/8g5857qvudsnwquf > >> > >> > >> This poll has now run a week. There are four respondents. Both statements > >> got 2 agreements, so this does not appear to be rough consensus. > > > > Smooth parity withstands. > > I am deducing to ask research folks whether routing point granualrity > > matters to routing scalability. > > although I do not quite understand the definition of "routing point":
Node in a graph. > maybe you could get some answers by examining what factors affect routing > scalability? > > Lixia > > _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
