Christian, > The requirement for support on both sides implies that an "upgraded" > edge network using mapped IDs will no longer be reachable from "legacy" > edge networks that do not yet support the mapping. This is a > disincentive for edge networks to adopt the ID/locator split mechanism > during an early transition stage. This would seem to be incorrect. There is no reason that early adopters need withdraw their "legacy" routes from the DFZ until it makes sense. So legacy sites reach the site via the legacy system, and the upgraded sites use the new mechanism. You could even have example.com (legacy) and example-new.com (or whatever). Or both, depending on what makes sense. It also seems pretty obvious that more work is required on transition strategies, but I just wanted to mention that one could imagine many scenarios in which benefit can be accrued w/o a flag day (i.e., incrementally). Dave
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature