RE: Architectural approaches to multi6

["Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>]

OK that is fair.
/jim

 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [mailto:iljitsch@muada.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 5:48 PM
> To: Bound, Jim
> Cc: RJ Atkinson; multi6@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Architectural approaches to multi6
> 
> 
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Bound, Jim wrote:
> 
> > > 3: remove addresses from all places in the protocol stack 
> above the IP
> > >    layer. If higher layers are unaware of addresses and 
> the addresses
> > >    follow the topology, IP can route around failures by changing
> > >    addresses.
> 
> > Wearing my IP stack product developer hat.  Errrrr maybe in 
> the year 
> > 2050 if we start now.  The entire stack on end systems and routing 
> > code on embedded systems I have worked with have addresses not only 
> > embedded but permeated through all layers.  I see the 
> vision but don't 
> > have to be real here?
> 
> Yes, we have to be real at some point but not just yet. First 
> we have to determine if 3. has merit.
> 
> And I have reason to believe transition won't be as hard as 
> it may seem at first glance.
> 
> 
>