re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean

[Xu Xiaohu <xuxh@huawei.com>]

Hi Noel and Dino,

> 
> > You can drop the "Without that commitment". It's very simple:
> >
> >  Any solution that *requires* host changes is infeasible.

According to this criteria, many proposals, including v6 EID over v4 RLOC of
LISP have been sentenced to death.

> > End of story.
> >
> > (For one, earler versions of Windows don't use/support Windows
> > Update, and a
> > lot of people have it turned off anyway, from paranoia/prudence/
> > whatever. But
> > just in general, there's a lot of old stuff out there, not just
> > Windows.)
> 
> Even if everyone had Windows Update enabled, it would take too long to
> get every system upgraded.

Most of today's core routers have already been able to support more than 1
million routing entries, is there enough incentive for the carriers to
deploy map&encap scheme within a short period. 

Should we take a survey to reach an agreement on when the new address and
routing scheme should be deployed?

> The most popular network-based application is your favorite browser.
> How many of them are not on the latest rev?
> 
> Upgrading roughly 2 to 4 CE routers at every site on the Internet will
> happen in far less time than changing every host.

The approach that map implemented by hosts and encapsulation implemented by
ITRs is incremental deployable. If hosts have not been changed to support
this capability, the ITR can implement the map and encapsulation together.
The upgraded hosts will not suffer the initial packet loss/latency pain. And
the ITR with upgraded site network doesn't need a cache.

Best wishes,
Xiaohu XU



--
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