Dimitri,
section 3.10 of
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-rrg-design-goals-01>
3.10. Deployability
Since solutions that are not deployable are simply academic
exercises, solutions are required to be deployable from a technical
perspective. Furthermore, given the extensive deployed base of
today's Internet, a solution is required to be incrementally
deployable.
--> i would state that the solution should not be constrained by which
system (host vs network) will require changes/updates (it may be both at
the end) as long as fulfilling the incremental deployability design
goal.
I would agree. That's already what I said in Prague and after my
presentation most attendees seemed to agree.
http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be/publications/reconsidering-internet-routing-archit
the real question is: incremental does not necessarily mean impact free
even if a solution initially targets only host or network updates -
which is the open question faced with LISP
I agree. Increamental deployability is not a criteria which is easy to
quantify...
Olivier
--
http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be , Universite catholique de Louvain, Belgium
--
to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
