As already mentioned, I did describe my solution when "we" submitted the  
NIRA-project proposal for being funded by the EU,but it was rated to be POOR 
and  
therefore rejected.I still think that the NIRA objectives are  outstanding,at 
least far ahead of what this community is dreaming of. With  the scalability 
problem eliminated,  much better TE objectives as well as  new services could 
be envisioned for decades to come.
(Note, you never consider p2mp/mp2mp inside LISP etc. !)
 
Remains the question whether the  NIRA-objectives are feasible? I indirectly 
provided proofs by  submitting well computed graphs. In view of the outcome, I 
was well  advised not to disclose the used algorithm. 
I am pretty sure that the evaluator subscribes to RAM/RRG-  mailinglists. I 
am also waiting to see any other ideas being taken to these  mailinglists which 
come from the 150 adopted projects. My hope is, that there  will be another 
research project opportunity somewhere in the future.
So I do not mind that LISP etc. is continued in the meantime.But I  sometimes 
observe the hereby hit obstacles and think none of all this sweat is  needed.
 
Heiner
 
 
In einer eMail vom 07.11.2007 01:29:24 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:

Hello  Heiner,

You have written a number of messages indicating that there is  some
radically different, superior and (I guess) simpler approach to  the
routing scalability problems than those currently being  contemplated
with LISP-CONS/NERD, eFIT-APT, Ivip, TRRP or various  moderate
enhancements to BGP.

However, I don't think you haven't  written about what you are
proposing as an alternative.

Your  site:

http://www.hummel-research.de

has a Flash  presentation which mentions "Multipath Direction Field
MPDF", but Google  finds no other mention of this.

Where is your proposal clearly  documented?

Incremental deployment means (perhaps amongst other things)  that
there are immediate overall benefits for the early adopters of a  new
technology.  Any scheme which requires complete upgrades of all  BGP
routers, all hosts etc. is not at all incrementally  adoptable.
Likewise, a scheme in which the address space managed by the  new
system is unreachable from non-upgraded networks is  not
incrementally deployable, because virtually all of the people  who
might initially adopt this new space would find the loss  of
connectivity a far greater problem than whatever benefits the  new
system provided.

- Robin


--
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







   

Reply via email to