"J. Noel Chiappa" <jnc(_at_)ginger(_dot_)lcs(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu> writes:
??? I said nothing about Mobile IPv6 being a solution to the routing problem.
We were talking about the routing problem. If you just brought it up
to be clever (which I assume you did), you didn't further the
discussion.
Lets deal with the situation on the ground. It is costing
organizations vast amounts of money to deal with NAT. It is causing
serious disruptions in our infrastructure and protocols to deal with
NAT. v6, which is (believe it or not) being deployed lets us get past
the address space exhaustion problem. Whether you like the fact that
it doesn't solve everything or not, it is the only available solution
to a very real problem.
Or to put it another way, the folks deploying v6 are doing something
about the problem -- they've got running code and running networks and
running applications -- and you're bitching in the hotel bar at the
IETF. v6 is even in Windows XP. Deployment wins.
So we are left with the routing problem.
My own feeling is that we're just going to have to accept the notion
of our routers having millions of routes in them and go for algorithms
that scale better than distance vector or path vector so we don't
drive them into the ground while doing the computations. We can't get
rid of the desire to have huge numbers of routes so we have to find
ways to avoid nuking ourselves when we have huge numbers of routes. It
would be nice if we could come up with the perfect new architecture
but no one has yet designed it.
--
Perry E. Metzger perry(_at_)wasabisystems(_dot_)com
--
NetBSD Development, Support & CDs. http://www.wasabisystems.com/