Hi Noel, | > The only way to maintain that | > abstraction within the ID space is by renumbering. | > Map and encap does not 'solve' the problem, it only |pushes it from BGP | > into the mapping function. | |I disagree with the second two of these three statements. | |For the second, I see absolutely no need for renumbering |within an identifier |space. About the only hazard of keeping forever an existing |identifier string |is 'resolver lock in', but we have the exact same issues in |DNS, and seem to |have found acceptable answers to these issues there.
For DNS, we don't have a 'push' model that forces people to hold data that they have no need for, and thus the need for aggregation is greatly reduced. |As to the third, a distributed mapping functionality is |fundamentally a whole |different - and easier - kettle of fish from a distributed |path-selection |computation. The latter is (necessarily) a computation, and |depending on how |it's split up for distribution, it can become quite painful. |(The Destination |Vector approach, where the computations of the algorithm are |themselves is |distributed, is the worst case.) Even the best cases are still far more |complex than the distribution of a mapping, though. So then why are the ALT folks reusing distributed path-computation for distributing a mapping? Tony -- 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
