[arin-ppml] Routing Research Group is about to decide its scalable routing recommendation

[Michel Py]

Robin,

> Robin Whittle wrote:
> I can't find mention of MHAP in my archive of RRG messages.

MHAP was a too-little-too-late off-IETF effort.

> A core-edge separation scheme does the work in ITRs and ETRs,
> so there are no questions about host software.  This is more
> complex than at present - but extra complexity seems unavoidable.

I know, I designed one years ago ;-)

Read the following link, it's short.
You may find that it looks a lot like what you are talking about.
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/draft-py-mhap-intro-00.txt

Read this one very fast; don't bother getting into the details.
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/draft-py-mhap-01a.txt

Finally, this page may provide you with interesting historic
information:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/
Keep it mind it's for part a graveyard of torpedoed-by-the-IETF
solutions. Any effort to revive any of these concepts there will have to
understand why they failed in the first place.


> Robin Whittle wrote:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipngwg-gseaddr-00
> I had a quick look at it, but it is for IPv6 only so I
> didn't study it in depth.

Anything at the time was designed with the assumption that IPv6 would be
widely deployed by now. In the "Goals and non-goals" section of MHAP, I
wrote in 2002:

> There is no goal at this time to provide an IPv4 solution.
> Although the protocol could be adapted to IPv4, the editor
> does not think that it can realistically implemented on
> today's Internet without a successful IPv6 implementation,
> and, by the time that is realized, solving the IPv4 problem
> might be a non-issue.

Enjoy!

Michel.