Hi Lixia, In "Re: [RRG] Moving forward..." you wrote:
> You are not in the non-consensus camp :-) Yes, but that consensus may be too rough and too restrictive for the RRG to continue with. I understand from the recent discussion between Tony, Bill and perhaps others that the question of whether we need to pursue an IPv4 solution or not: http://psg.com/lists/rrg/2008/msg01417.html Our recommendation should be applicable to IPv6. It may or may not also apply to IPv4, but at the very least must provide a path forward for IPv6. is up for discussion or at least a more formal vote. > I had some private exchange with Tony on this issue, but let me put it > in public to help the consensus gathering: I agree that the solution > must work for IPv6, but at the same time, > - IPv4/v6 share the same architecture; the only major fundamental > difference is their address space size. I think this is far too broad-brush. As Bill Herrin and I have argued, IPv6's address space, low installed base and lack of urgency about routing scaling make for a much wider set of possible solutions, developed over a longer time frame, than would be possible with for IPv4. > - my notion of the RRG task is to develop an architectural > solution to routing scalability. How do you define "architectural"? Do you mean changing the very nature of the thing to be something which has no scaling problems? I think of map-encap as an architectural addition, but other people may regard it as a kludge: a bolt-on thing which is inelegant and poorly integrated with the current architecture. So to them, map-encap is not an architectural solution. > - We should step up a level from looking specific versions of > IP at this stage of solution development. Our solution has to be > an architectural change, and should work for either version. As just noted, I think this is too abstract and would lead to a discussion which ignores important distinctions between IPv4 and IPv6. My previous message suggests we pursue three avenues of research at once, since I think we can't reliably rule out any of them at present. - 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
