RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space

["Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>]

Bill,
 

|BTW, my counter proof to Tony's claim only addressed single-homed
|cases where PI is a necessary consequence of the requirements. Nearly
|all multi-vendor multi-homed cases require PI to function to an
|appropriate standard as well.


Can we safely assume that this is due to session resilience on link failure?
Or is there some other driver?


|We're well past the point where "PI for servers" should be considered
|an architectural requirement until proven otherwise.


Again, isn't PI a point solution?  While PA today is not currently
acceptable, your claim, if true, negates just about every solution presented
here.  I'm not prepared to accept it as axiomatic.

Tony


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.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