[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[RRG] Separation vs. Elimination
- To: "'Routing Research Group'" <email@example.com>
- Subject: [RRG] Separation vs. Elimination
- From: Dan Jen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:36:06 -0700
We have published a paper comparing the two major approaches
discussed on the RRG regarding routing scalability: separation and
elimination. We believe that the proposals discussed on the list can be
placed into either of these two categories. The paper goes on to argue
why separation is a better direction than elimination when trying to
achieve routing scalability.
The separation approach involves separating edge networks from core
networks, taking edge prefixes out of the routing tables. Map & Encap
schemes such as APT, LISP, and Ivip fall into this category. So do
translation schemes such as SixOne.
The elimination approach eliminates the use of PI addresses,
moving edge networks into aggregatable PA blocks. Transport layer
solutions fall into this category, as well as Shim6.
The paper will be presented at the upcoming Hotnets VII workshop. It
can be found here:
Agree? Disagree? Questions/Comments welcomed.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com 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