> From: Scott Brim <scott(_dot_)brim(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
> LISP does nothing for decentralization. Traffic still flows
> hierarchically
Umm, no. In fact, one of LISP's architectural scaling issues is that it's
non-hierarchical, so xTRs have neighbour fanouts that are much larger than
typical packet switches. In basic unicast mode, any xTR is always a direct
neighbour to any other xTR; no xTR (in basic unicast mode, at least) ever goes
_through_ another xTR to get to a third xTR. All LISP basic unicast paths
always include exactly two xTRs.
The actual detailed paths do mimic the underlying network, of course: if the
network is hierarchical, the paths will be hierarchical, but if the network
were flat, the paths would be flat. (Or is that what you meant?)
> you add the mapping system which is naturally hierarchical and another
> vulnerability.
No more so than DNS; they are exactly parallel in their functional design.
Noel