Re: [RRG] Why delaying initial packets matters - complex web pages & real-time P2P

[Scott Brim <swb@employees.org>]

I'm not sure I understand all of this message, but it seems that you
are suggesting that every site have both non-globally-routed EIDs
(found by map&encap) and globally-routed addresses (found by BGP), for
different purposes.  

First, this does not appear to cut down on any of the rate*state
problems we are struggling with.  Some sites might not need
multihoming for the endpoints they keep using globally routed
addresses for, but not many.

I can see having whole *sites* globally routed or mapped.  That's
guaranteed to happen and may be the case forever, which is why we talk
about usually talk about "interworking" and "coexistence" instead of
"transition".  Having two systems running in parallel covering the
same territory doesn't remove any problems and adds complexity.  I
respect the goal but this isn't the answer :-).

Regarding mobile nodes, you say "clients" may be willing to get
temporarily assigned "addresses".  In that case the problems are the
same whether you use globally routed addresses or non-globally-routed,
mapped ones.

Excerpts from William Herrin on Fri, Feb 15, 2008 05:54:13PM -0500:
> The conclusion, it seems to me, is that the desirable outcome is a
> hybrid system in which a fellow in Operations can consider both PI
> space and Fast space, and then choose the one best suited to his
> particular application.

I understand PI but not "Fast".

Thanks ... Scott

--
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