> From: Robin Whittle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Nov 21, 2008 6:49 PM
> Short version:
>
> I am opposed to any host-based solution to the
> routing and scaling problem - for reasons mentioned
> in recent messages. Below is a fictitious
> document for a routing scaling solution which
> I hope will remain fictitious:
>
> RACHH - Routing and Addressing Changes Handled in Hosts
>
> Folks who want to pursue this approach might like
> to consider how they will convince the vast
> majority of:
>
> OS programmers x,000
> Application programmers x0,000
> ISPs x0,000
> End-users x00,000,000
>
> to spend time and money on implementing the
> host-based scheme (and the shift to IPv6). Until
> all (or almost all) of these people act to adopt
> the new scheme, we will all remain dependent on
> IPv4 - or IPv6 without a scalable routing.
It's become fashionable to assert that host based solutions
are undeployable. I would like to recall that the model for
rolling out shim6 is very clear - in MS-talk it's called
"Updates are ready for your computer" - since *all* it requires
is an IP stack upgrade. There are absolutely no changes for upper
layers (except maybe a small tweak for SCTP code) and absolutely
no changes for routers or ISPs. Of course, it's true that shim6
is not much use until a critical mass of users have installed
that update, and it doesn't include TE features for ISPs.
But the deployment model is o(OS programmers) in terms of
significant cost.
It's clear that once you ask for action by application
programmers or non-routine action by end users, the costs
become unthinkable.
Brian
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
