[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space




On Jun 19, 2008, at 1:05 AM, Robin Whittle wrote:

Hi Lixia,

Yes, by "portable" I meant:

To me a PI prefix has 2 separable meanings: globally uniqueness, and
portability.

I tried to give a short version in my original message:

 http://psg.com/lists/rrg/2008/msg01310.html

   End-user networks need their own portable address space.

In the context of this discussion, it is assumed the space is globally
reachable - and "their own" implies the address space is globally unique.

Robin, thanks for your long and detailed reply (I wish I could write that fast:)

I tend to identify separable issues. We agree that a PI prefix really means 2 things, and portability is only one of the two. That's all my msg last night intends to clarify.

I agree with you too that RRG aims at an architectural solution to routing scalability problem, the topic pursued on another ongoing thread

.....

BTW, can you or anyone else point me to the "Handley Proposal"?

look for the msg Mark sent to RRG
  Date: February 18, 2008 9:35:09 PM PST
  Subject: [RRG] Are we solving the wrong problem?

Lixia

--
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