Tony Li wrote:
It's just a mess. I think that we all can agree that a real locator/
identifier split is the correct architectural direction, but that's
simply not politically tractable. If the real message that the
provider community is trying to send is that they want this, and not
IPv6 as it stands today, then that's the message that should be sent,
without reference to shim6.
Tony
How is a split between locator / identifier any different logicaly from
the existing ipv4 source routing?
I thought that got dead ended?
Or is a table lookup going to be needed?
Wont all those tables need to be in the exact (or close to) same place
as the current routing tables?
Appreciate any enlightenment.
Joe