[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
On 13/03/2012, at 8:14 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 12 Mar 2012, at 21:15 , William Herrin wrote:
>
>> Not at all. You just build a second tier to the routing system.
>
> It's so strange how people think a locator/identifier split will solve the scalability problem. We already have two tiers: DNS names and IP addresses. So that didn't solve anything. I don't see any reason a second second tier would.
I think you have encountered an article of faith Iljitsch :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirectio: Any problem can be solved by adding another layer of indirection.
- References:
- filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: jsw at inconcepts.biz (Jeff Wheeler)
- filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: joelja at bogus.com (Joel jaeggli)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: rs at seastrom.com (Robert E. Seastrom)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: seth.mos at dds.nl (Seth Mos)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: seth.mos at dds.nl (Seth Mos)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin)
- Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)