Weekly Routing Table Report
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Sat Aug 31 23:08:04 UTC 2019
Scott Weeks wrote:
> I have been reading your posts on IETF and here regarding the
> above and I'm curious as to your thoughts on John Day's RINA.
As you give no reference, let's rely on wikipedia
and restrict scope only for multihoming.
Then, it is true that:
> 1972. Multi-homing not supported by the ARPANET.
which means current specifications do not support multihoming very well.
but, the statement
> The solution was obvious: as in operating systems, a logical address
> space naming the nodes (hosts and routers) was required on top of the
> physical interface address space.
is wrong, because it is enough to let transport layer identify
connections based on a set of physical interface addresses of
all the interfaces, which is what draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-*
That is, he misunderstand restrictions by the current specification
something inevitably required by layering.
> It tosses all this on its head.
If you have some text of RINA denying the E2E argument, quote it
with URLs please.
More information about the NANOG