[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
re: [RRG] Consensus check: mapping granularity
> 发件人: Olivier Bonaventure [mailto:Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be]
> 发送时间: 2008年3月20日 11:17
> 收件人: Xu Xiaohu
> 抄送: firstname.lastname@example.org; 'Routing Research Group'
> 主题: Re: [RRG] Consensus check: mapping granularity
> >>> The identifier to locator mapping function should support mapping
> > entries
> >>> for both host identifiers and their aggregates.
> >> For scalability reasons, I would propose to define this requirement as
> >> follows :
> >> The identifier to locator mapping function MUST support mapping entries
> >> for aggregates of identifiers. It MAY also support mapping entries for
> >> host identifiers.
> > Hi Tony and Olivier,
> > Does this requirement imply that the identifier must be a hierarchical
> > (not flat label) so as to be aggregatable?
> I don't think that a hierarchy is necessary. What is required is a
> mapping system that deals with blocks of identifiers and not with
> individual identifiers.
Let's take an example, can the host identifier (flat label) in HIP or i3
meet the above requirement of the mapping system?
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg