|I think we have a sense of the scale that bothers us for the RIB/FIB, |namely going much above a million entries. Do we have a similar sense |for the mapping table? (In other words, what will be the required |granularity of the aggregates in the map?)
I think the real question is whether aggregates are required at all. If so, then I think we have an issue that leads us down the NAT path. Now, if someone has some mapping technology that does not require aggregation at all (DHTs?), then there is a possible alternate to NATs. 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
