On Jan 9, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Can we clarify that conceptually we are talking about prefixes and not individual interface EIDs, as far as the full map goes? (Except, presumably, for a few special cases such as root servers.)
Well, this should spark some useful discussion... ;-)Sorry, no, I don't think that you can make that assumption without a lot more justification and/or consensus building. There are large organizations (you used to work for one of them, I believe ;-) where there are multiple Internet connections that have geographically widely dispersed contact points. Optimal routing implies that there will be different locator preferences for different hosts. Mobility within the organization itself implies that creating and maintaining meaningful identifier prefixes is going to prove challenging.
In other words, I think that we need host level granularity in the mapping function.
I *don't* think that we need per-interface granularity, as the semantics of an identifier should be host-specific, not identifier specific.
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