nanog mailing list archives
Re: Routing wars pending?
From: Tony Li <tli () cisco com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:25:59 -0800
Silly. We already *do have two namespaces*. One is EIDs in form of FQDNs. They are portable. Another is IPv4 addresses which aren't. A FQDN is NOT useable as an EID. The host is not the endpoint. Sorry, nobody managed to make any reasonable case pro magic-cookie EIDs as yet. The best rationale i've heard was from Noel who said that his "architect's sense" tells him so. Funny thing, a surgeon i know was at loss when i asked him about this function of organism, should be a new discovery in medicine. Consider process migration. Tony
Current thread:
- Routing wars pending?, (continued)
- Routing wars pending? Daniel Karrenberg (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Michael Dillon (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Ehud Gavron (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Tom 'moof' Spindler (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? A Page in the Life of ... (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Robert Elz (Nov 15)
- Routing wars pending? Daniel Karrenberg (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Tony Li (Nov 15)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Tim Bass (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Michael A. Patton (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? Paul A Vixie (Nov 16)
- Re: Routing wars pending? @NANOG-LIST (Nov 16)
