Dino,
It is not at all clear if it is a problem. In fact, I'll argue on some points it could be a feature.
Sure. I don't want to make an argument that the delay/drop characteristics of caching are horrible. In fact, while I know this is an issue, I do not have any information about whether it is of significant practical consequence. This why I'm asking you to find a test for this in EXPLISP.
Well, one thing this list keeps doing is trying to draw the line where architecture should stop leaving it for some other process, say engineering, to make the really hard decisions. If the architecture is too high-level and doesn't "draw a line in the sand", then the practical architecture will happen after this step in the process.This is true, and I'm very eager to make the decisions about details that matter. For instance, encapsulation, how the mapping function works, etc. However, based on what I said in my initial mail, I'm not sure caching is one of those details. It seems that you can implement caching without impact, for instance, the mapping system. And you can implement FIB caching in today's routers with today's Internet architecture if you want. If you believe that is necessary then maybe you should do that. But I believe the RRG should be more concerned with the details that HAVE to be agreed upon.So you can't punt very many things or you become irrelevant.
Jari -- 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