I-D Action:draft-azinger-scalable-addressing-00.txt

Carlos Morgado chbm at chbm.net
Thu Sep 30 19:24:42 CEST 2010

On 2010/09/30, at 17:02, Gert Doering wrote:

> Hi,
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:45:33AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:
>> If that's an acceptable solution, then pick any arbitrary path from the N*M possible address pairs and use that.  Same result.
> No, it isn't.  In the "single source, single destination" address, I have
> network elements and network admins that feel compelled to make sure that
> this single combination is the one that works.
> In the N*M problem, the problem is shifted to the end systems, and it's
> to be expected that there is a difference in quality between the possible
> combinations.  So I have a "find the best combination out of N*M" problem
> here, while in the first case I only have a single combination, and there
> is no need to select anything in the end host.
> For me, this looks like quite a different thing.

Exactly the point I was trying to get across. Shifting routing decisions to hosts is utterly bad. 
Might as well make ospf/isis a requirement for v6 hosts.

> Gert
> -- 
> did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
> SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list