IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] Locator: routing scalability

Toni Stoev <irtf@tonistoev.info> Fri, 15 May 2009 02:01 UTC

Return-Path: <irtf@tonistoev.info>
X-Original-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127413A6C5A for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2009 19:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.174
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.174 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.425, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EJe2L3tI7tvT for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2009 19:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chi.r1servers.com (chi.r1servers.com [82.119.92.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ABB83A6BD5 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2009 19:01:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 85-91-132-61.spectrumnet.bg ([85.91.132.61] helo=laptop.local) by chi.r1servers.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <irtf@tonistoev.info>) id 1M4mlX-0003HY-94 for rrg@irtf.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 05:03:15 +0300
From: Toni Stoev <irtf@tonistoev.info>
To: IRTF RRG <rrg@irtf.org>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 05:03:14 +0300
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
References: <cc9.5094be77.373dc69a@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <cc9.5094be77.373dc69a@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200905150503.14626.irtf@tonistoev.info>
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - chi.r1servers.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - irtf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tonistoev.info
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Subject: Re: [rrg] Locator: routing scalability
X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <rrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg>
List-Post: <mailto:rrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 02:01:51 -0000

> > Does locator have to facilitate routing with its structure?
> > 
> > Toni
> 
> I have the same answer.
> Yes it must.
> With strategy C such that by 90 % a single table-offset (i.e. as by the  
> locator) retrieves the next hop.
> 
> Heiner

The next hop is a neighbor node. What is the easiest case to retrieve it from locator? Locator containing it.
So here's next question I have the pleasure to ask our attentive peers:
Must locator structure show explicit topology/reachability/routability?

My answer: Let me listen before speak.

Toni

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email