[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean
- To: "Noel Chiappa" <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
- Subject: Re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean
- From: "William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:34:50 -0400
- Cc: rrg@psg.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Kas6Qmb6kkwkRJqiOO4hvf0yS0i33hdX1WSzVMRZDTy58ZXFew50wRNHkl2fbLc1jTdM0Zu2JJAosoIgYSmCKoAQ8YtF/Frp+kRrvJ44gptZiFBovR6fXER/jXKC+d+SWj7e/fW3PKa7LfPzBOe4mQ39h/BGWf2VhQQmYW8rLew=
- In-reply-to: <20080325153405.6A34C872C0@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
- References: <20080325153405.6A34C872C0@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
> Any solution that *requires* host changes is infeasible. End of story.
Noel,
I'm not comfortable with quite that broad a statement. Consider the
following scenario:
You create a map-encap system. There are some host software upgrades
that make everything work great. Non-upgraded hosts still work, but
they suffer a 10% performance penalty and certain diagnostic tools
(like traceroute) malfunction.
Do we want to eliminate this scenario from consideration before we've
seen what capabilities and efficiencies it enables?
I'd go for a slightly more moderate statement: A solution is
infeasible if host changes are a -prerequisite-.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
--
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