Re: WG next steps

[Peter Tattam <peter@jazz-1.trumpet.com.au>]

On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Masataka Ohta wrote:

> Tony Li;
> 
> > I have no problems with transport changes being part of the solution.
> > In fact, I expect that that's a requirement.  However, dealing with
> > DFZ explosion IS a big part of the problem and it MUST be addressed
> > by routing and addressing changes. Today's IPv4 architecture doesn't
> > scale and MUST NOT be propagated into IPv6.
> 
> Scalability is restored by NOT relying on routing, so that
> no change on routing is necessary.
> 
> Any attempt to rely on intermediate intelligence of routing
> does not scale.

This is intuitively correct, but I have a hunch that pushing the intellegence
into the end points raises a whole bunch of security problems.  Traditionally
we believe routers have been secure (this may not be case in reality), and this
has been the motivation to find a solution that does not entail end point
intelligence to solve the MH problem.

> 
> 							Masataka Ohta
> 
> 

Peter

--
Peter R. Tattam                            peter@trumpet.com
Managing Director,    Trumpet Software International Pty Ltd
Hobart, Australia,  Ph. +61-3-6245-0220,  Fax +61-3-62450210