[Forked from: "Fundamental objections to a host-based scalable routing
solution"]
Christian Vogt wrote:
[...] As I have tried to explain in Minneapolis, a hostname-oriented
stack architecture would mitigate these issues [...]
I should have been more elaborative for those who couldn't make it to
Minneapolis:
Assuming that the goals of RRG are to enable multi-homing and to
eliminate renumbering in a scalable manner: The argument I brought
forth in Minneapolis was NOT that these goals could be fully solved with
a host-based solution. The suggestion was instead for RRG to consider a
pair of host-based plus network-based solution. Since the two goals are
independent of each other, they may well be best addressed with separate
solutions: It is obvious that renumbering can be eliminated only with a
network-based solution. And as previous email discussions indicate,
multi-homing may best be enabled with a host-based solution. In fact, I
don't see a convincing technical reason to address both goals with a
single solution. Trying to do that would simply make our job harder.
Regardless of which solution pair is picked, the solutions in the pair
would have to be independent of each other. A mutual dependency between
host upgrades and network upgrades would impose deployment hurdles,
which in my opinion would be insurmountable. But if each solution in
the pair provides benefits independently of the other, and if those
benefits are complementary, then the solution pair may deployment-wise
well be superior to a single one-size-fits-all solution.
- Christian
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
