On Aug 14, 2008, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
We need to be realistic and recognize that fixing the API isn't going to do anything to solve the current routing scalability problem.
Iljitsch, you are right that the RRG is, in fact, looking at two problems: - the routing scalability problem - the convolution between locators and identifiers in host stacks But: You are arguing that (1) solving the second isn't worthwhile (2) because it would fail to help solving the first. I don't quite agree on either of these arguments. Regarding (1): Improving the API would have the following benefits: - easier application programming - clean separation of identifiers and locators, hence simpler mobility and multi-homing support - easier NAT traversal - less complex network renumbering because applications are unaffected Hence I believe a new API would be worthwhile. Regarding (2): A new API may be a building block in a new routing architecture. Since a new API would make renumbering easier as noted above, it may facilitate the wide class of routing scalability solutions that require edge network renumbering on provider changes. - Christian -- 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
