![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| so i had a nearby scheme interpreter yay. (now go fix all the buggy scheme and lisp packages in -current :) :) :) ) | It seems obvious to me that the only way routing can scale with | addresses this large is with very aggressive aggregation. It would work better still with abstraction, hence my (maybe stupid) questions to Brian and Christian. | The only way multihoming can work when aggressive aggregation is in | place is if hosts end up with multiple addresses (one from each | prefix) and know how to use them intelligently... Even trickier: how to get non-local hosts to use them intelligently. The DNS as a mechanism for policy-based routing (in the sense of remotely influencing other people's path selection) is not totally without appeal. But then again, I'm a loon, and like NAT. Sean.
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.