Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the recommendation process

["Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>]

Most of the scalability discussions we have had are dealing exactly with
the mapping system, not how to tunnel or rewrite the addresses. The
mapping system is the architecture that uses the tunnels or address
manipulation based on some address structure.  A tunneling
scheme/address rewrite together with an address structure is not
sufficient for scalabilty. 


- Hannu


>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On 
>Behalf Of ext Tony Li
>Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 11:52
>To: Brian E Carpenter
>Cc: [e-mail]; Lixia Zhang
>Subject: Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the 
>recommendation process
>
>Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>>> Mapping systems are obviously a component of a solution but are not 
>>> by themselves a solution.  To be considered seriously, they 
>should be 
>>> used in conjunction with some network layer solution.
>> 
>> Hmm. Don't you think that to some extent these should be orthogonal?
>> A mapping mechanism needs to meet the specific requirements of a 
>> network layer mechanism, but that doesn't require the two to be 
>> irrevocably bound to each other.
>> 
>> I have a feeling that the mapping system should be very general in 
>> nature, in case the first cut at either the locator or identifier 
>> space proves to fall short. Also I feel it should support hierarchy, 
>> even if we don't need a hierarchy from the start.
>
>
>
>Brian,
>
>Our recommendation is focused on providing an alternative 
>routing architecture.  A mapping system is a fine component, 
>but would not seem to provide a credible architecture by itself.
>
>Tony
>
>_______________________________________________
>rrg mailing list
>[e-mail]
>http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
>