Re: PROs/CONs of SIP/PIP/TUBA

[Steve Deering <[e-mail]>]

> While I could be wrong from my last reading of IPAE, if I move my end
> system from one place to another all of the addresses I used to connect
> to will have changed.

That's incorrect.  Maybe you are confusing IPAE with NAT?

> Why else are they exploring these methods to download addresses?

What "downloading" are you referring to?

> Sorry Steve, but connection-oriented or not, pdus with different
> priorities are simply different flows.

Yes, I understand that model.  What I was talking about is how those
flows should be identified, by address+priority or by address alone.

> I realize that this is a shift in frame of reference in how we normally
> think about things and that such shifts are hard to think about.

One of the goals of the SIP design is to avoid unnecessary shifts of
frames of reference, so that SIP isn't hard to think about.

> Doing the routing does not require doing a directory lookup for each
> packet's destination address (or only if you look at the problem wrong).
> The router merely has to know how it treats which flows which are
> identified by their addresses.

Are you proposing that the priority be indicated by well-known values
in a well-known subfield of the addresses, or does the mapping of
address to priority require external information, such as a directory
entry or information distributed in a routing protocol?  If the latter,
it will be significantly and unnecessarily more expensive to support.

> You are making this problem too difficult.

Maybe you are making its solution too expensive?

Steve