RE: [RRG] RE: What do we have consensus on?

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

Hi Robin,


|> We also have consensus that mapping systems that there should be
|> active mechanisms for dealing with overload situations.  
|
|I don't understand this or recall the discussion.  Can you point me
|to that discussion.


Ok, after a more careful look at the mailing list, I see that we started the
discussion and we haven't done a formal consensus check, so I'd like to
retract that.  We did discuss and I do have some proposed text that I think
captures where we are, but we haven't been formal about it.


|I wasn't suggesting we only try to solve the IPv4 routing scaling
|problem, or that the solution should only work for IPv4.  However, I
|think the urgency of implementing the solution in IPv6 is less - so
|we could probably afford to wait and learn from the IPv4 experience.


You are, of course, welcome to your opinion.  However, IMHO, it is
inappropriate to use IPv4 as a proving ground.  We cannot reasonably ask the
entire world to change routing architectures *as an experiment*.  We need to
perform experiments to be sure, and they may be done on v4, but by the time
that we reach the scale of the entire network, we should be extremely
certain of the outcome.

Thus, I feel that the real overriding requirement is that we have a solution
applicable to v6.  

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