Randall,
% 1) If you put Loc/ID functionality in hosts, then they % will have to change. Don't want to do this because % it kills deployability. This question, for which Dino's view is expressed above, is actually pretty central to the discussions here. A) Some folks on this list (e.g. Dino) believe that the Routing RG cannot select an approach requiring any host stack changes -- because that necessarily precludes deployment. B) Other folks on this list (e.g. Jari) believe that the Routing RG can select an approach requiring host stack changes because that is done by the IETF in the ordinary course of IETF work.
I personally think that the architecture should not preclude on which kind of systems it will be deployed. Some environments will want router-based solutions (e.g. corporate networks), others will prefer host based solutions (e.g. home environments). The architecture that RRG will develop should be deployable on both hosts and routers.
Concerning the ease of deployment of new features, ten years ago routers were easier to upgrade than hosts, but nowadays most hosts are patched every month or so and thus deploying a new feature on a large number of hosts is not difficult. I'm not aware of any router vendor providing automatic upgrades of its OS.
Olivier -- http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be , Universite catholique de Louvain, Belgium -- 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