Hi Olivier, Thanks for explaining your reasoning:
> The problem is that if the mapping system is required to map each host > identifier onto a (set of) locators, then I don't see how one can build > a stable and scalable mapping system. with which I disagree entirely. Just because the mapping system is capable of specifying mapping for a single IP address doesn't mean it is required to be able to do it for every IP address in the system. So there is no scaling problem with having the mapping system work with the location of boundaries between one EID prefixes / micronet and the next definable in units of single IP addresses. Maybe the final IPv4 mapping system will be able to handle 4 billion micronets, or maybe it can only handle a billion. A consumer terabyte hard drive could store 250 bytes of mapping for every single IPv4 address - so I don't see that storage is a problem. Whatever the maximum practical number of EID prefixes / micronets (which will grow over time as technology improves), it makes no sense to restrict the resolution with which an EID prefix / micronet could be defined (to ensure no such EID prefix / micronet could be smaller than some number of IP addresses) in order to somehow protect against the system ever being required to handle more than some maximum number of EID prefixes / micronets. - 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
