[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Evaluating multiaddressing proposals
Dave Crocker wrote as below, but it bounced due to a list subscription issue.
I see these comments as input to Eliot's draft.
Brian
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM
*** I will be on vacation February 3-25, 2004 ***
>
> Folks,
>
> I put together a list of categories that seem interesting for
> evaluating different multiaddressing proposals.
>
> No doubt the list is terrible. That's ok. Think of what follows as an
> excuse for everyone to fix it:
>
> Features
> Multiaddressing
> Multihoming, mobility, both
> Infrastructure
> None, sometimes, always
> IP version(s)
> Identifier
> Registered vs. ephemeral
> Rendezvous
> Creating the association
> After service interruption
>
> Overhead
> Per payload packet
> Control protocol
> Transport startup delay
> Scaling impact
> Constant per association, vs. deferred
> Administration
>
> d/
> --
> Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
> Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>