Subject: Re: [rrg] ILNP q1: Scalability

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:43:10 -0400 (EDT)

> From: Toni Stoev <[email-masked]>

    > But having named nodes as hops, the topology change is not just a link
    > change, but change in th e sequence of nodes.

You seem to be describing source routes (either loose or strict, I can't tell
which).

    > This naming is meant to be within a routing domain and from a starting
    > node, so it's actually maintenance of a default path tree.

And this is a source route using names which have only local (not global)
scope. That has been tried before, too.

	Noel

---

From: Toni Stoev <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:25:18 +0300

> You seem to be describing source routes (either loose or strict, I can't tell

I am describing a locator. It is formed as strict route. I present it for use as such.
 
> scope. That has been tried before, too.

It is a locator formed as strict route from a certain node within a domain. This node is common for all locators within the domain. Actually the domain is formed based on locators span.  The next-hop selection is comparison of destination and current nodes' locators for longest match.

> 	Noel

Toni