IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] Arguments in favour of Core-Edge Elimination vs. Separation?

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Tue, 26 January 2010 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
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 C40673A689F for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:33:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.228
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.228 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.371, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 aJpTIU89N9EJ for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:33:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150C83A67F4 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:33:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id E86B46BE564; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:33:32 -0500 (EST)
To: rrg@irtf.org
Message-Id: <20100126183332.E86B46BE564@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:33:32 -0500
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [rrg] Arguments in favour of Core-Edge Elimination vs. Separation?
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: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:33:23 -0000

    > From: Patrick Frejborg <pfrejborg@gmail.com>

    > CES is all about taking out the multi-homed PI addresses from the DFZ -
    > transforming them into PA-addresses (RLOCs, which are aggregated) and
    > provide a multi-homing solution for IPv6 so it will not further expand
    > the size of DFZ.

Exactly - except it's not just multi-homing, separating locatiom from
identity allows us to do many other things too - e.g. portability, mobility,
etc.

	Noel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email