On Mar 20, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Scott W Brim wrote:
I don't see any gain in VLAs at this point, but we might as well explicitly discuss the idea and decide so. The packet header form will follow the address form.
Perhaps we should reverse this. Do we agree that we're working with v6/v4 header formats? If so, then there's no way of doing a VLA (or VLL).
I'm still a champion of VLLs, just because we need the aggregation in the locator space, and our insanely poor usage of the namespace.
Tony -- to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.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