shim6 @ NANOG

Joe Abley jabley at
Sun Mar 5 20:28:05 UTC 2006

On 5-Mar-2006, at 14:16, Owen DeLong wrote:

> It flies if you look at changing the routing paradigm instead of  
> pushing
> routing decisions out of the routers and off to the hosts.  Source  
> Routing
> is a technology that most of the internet figured out is problematic
> years ago.  Making source routing more complicated and calling it  
> something
> else doesn't make it less of a bad idea.

Calling shim6 source-routing when it's not in order to give it an  
aura of evil is similarly unproductive :-)

> I don't think it will be as expensive as you think to fix it.  I  
> think if
> we start working on a new routing paradigm today in order to  
> support IDR
> based on AS PATH instead of Prefix, we would realistically see this in
> deployable workable code within 3-5 years.

I'm confused by statements such as these.

Was it not the lack of any scalable routing solution after many years  
of trying that led people to resort to endpoint mobility in end  
systems, à la shim6?


More information about the NANOG mailing list