In einer eMail vom 30.05.2007 10:15:59 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt
pekkas@netcore.fi:
....
3.6. Decoupling location and
identification
...
Solutions to both problems, i.e. (1) the decoupling
of
host location and identification information and (2) a
scalable
global routing system (whose solution may, or may
not, depend on the
second decoupling) are needed and it is
required that their solutions
are compatible with each
other.
==> the only requirement (using the language described in
section 1.2) I see
in this subsection that that the solutions are
compatible with each
other. Is that the intent? In particular was
'are needed' above meant
to be some priority? What does solution
compatibility requirement
even mean (in practice)?
Good question. Compatibility: IMHO, the solution must provide a
next-hop too. And this should at first be the only compatibility
constraint. Otherwise it wouldn't be research.
Will say: while searching for a new solution, the compatibility issue
should be ignored. However after a solution has been found, it is appropriate to
look for a migration path and deal with compatibility issues.
Heiner