[RRG] Address/prefix bunches

["Victor Grishchenko" <victor.grishchenko@gmail.com>]

Indeed, both Six/One and TAMARA ascend to 8+8 by O'Dell. So, please
consider the following as a friendly criticism.

In my opinion, the main shortcoming of the Six/One proposal is the
fact it sticks to the current technology and to the current business
practices (e.g. networks of PCs and access monopolies).

In particular, Six/One clearly separates transit and edge networks. At
the same time, even today, even single residential end-users tend to
multihome (see DLink's DI-LB604, the thing that brings you benefits of
shim6 right now for $115 plus delivery). Six/One accounts for some
ultimate "edge" typical in the network of PCs; as the world moves to
small connected devices, sensors, smart dust etc etc, the edge may
become virtually nonexistent (every PC may become a "provider" for a
zillion of little thingies). Again, even inside some today's "edge"
network one may easily find customers/businesses who want to
multihome.

As far as I can see, Six/One pads routing prefixes with link/subnet
IDs. This surely breaks any chance to apply prefix-bunch approach
recursively further.

I personally always remember that NAT is already here, it is cheap,
well-known and incrementally deployable. To make something of value we
must offer some real/general/fundamental advantage that will remain
actual for 10 years.
Why 10? Because e.g. the phrase "In the first phase, support for
Six/One will be introduced into hosts" costs ~10 years
(optimistically, 5). Will the problem still be actual in 10 years?
Will technology/business change?
Most surely, the playing field will change. Remember, what happened to
IPv6. Nobody can reiterate in 10-year cycles.

So finally, my point is: "there must be no edge".


                        Victor

--
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