Re: [RRG] Consensus check: mapping granularity

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Olivier,

Thanks for explaining your reasoning:

> The problem is that if the mapping system is required to map each host
> identifier onto a (set of) locators, then I don't see how one can build
> a stable and scalable mapping system.

with which I disagree entirely.

Just because the mapping system is capable of specifying mapping for
a single IP address doesn't mean it is required to be able to do it
for every IP address in the system.

So there is no scaling problem with having the mapping system work
with the location of boundaries between one EID prefixes / micronet
and the next definable in units of single IP addresses.

Maybe the final IPv4 mapping system will be able to handle 4 billion
micronets, or maybe it can only handle a billion.  A consumer
terabyte hard drive could store 250 bytes of mapping for every
single IPv4 address - so I don't see that storage is a problem.

Whatever the maximum practical number of EID prefixes / micronets
(which will grow over time as technology improves), it makes no
sense to restrict the resolution with which an EID prefix / micronet
could be defined (to ensure no such EID prefix / micronet could be
smaller than some number of IP addresses) in order to somehow
protect against the system ever being required to handle more than
some maximum number of EID prefixes / micronets.

 - Robin

--
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