RE: [RRG] Re: Supposed impossibility of scaling for mobility

["Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>]

|Others may disagree.


I'll take you up on that.


|1) Solving problems that we don't need to solve is going to weaken a 
|solution.  (Good solutions will, as Noel seems to like to put it, 
|unexpectedly solve additional problems.  But that is different for 
|designing to solve a varied selection of problems all at once.)


No matter what you and I say, some folks will try to use the routing
architecture to provide mobility (e.g. Connexion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connexion_by_Boeing).  As a result, we have no
choice but to deal with mobility, if only to bound the amount of damage that
is inflicted as a result.

If you don't want to deal with it under the label of mobility, then we can
change it to "the maximum amount of churn that any single player can
inject".
 

|2) "Mobility" is not a single problem.  In the text I have elided, you 
|indicate that you specifically mean mobility over 100s or 1,000s of 
|kilometers.  But other folks mean other things.  Solving "Mobility" is 
|almost meaningless, given the range of problems.


I submit that the range of the mobility is a total red herring.  As always,
we care about topological changes, not geographical ones.  From a
topological perspective, you can cause a 'mobility' event simply by
disabling one interface on your laptop and enabling another.  For a zero
physical distance move, you could, conceptually, change your topological
association completely.

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