North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: 2005-1, good or bad? [Was: Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing]

  • From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist
  • Date: Mon Mar 06 05:25:38 2006

On 6 mar 2006, at 11.10, Per Heldal wrote:

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 13:35:02 +0100, "Kurt Erik Lindqvist"
<[email protected]> said:
On 2 mar 2006, at 21.42, Andre Oppermann wrote:

Putting routing decisions
into the transport layer (4) as it is done or proposed with SCTP and
SHIM6 is Total Evilness(tm) in my book.
Not that shim6 is a change to transport though, but a change at layer

Isn't the fact that shim6 doesn't affect the forwarding-plane of routers
an argument that is used to its advantage? It seems more like something
mingling the transport and session layers if anyone ask me (not that the
old iso-model is all that relevant anymore imho).
Ok, so shim6 doesn't require a change to the transport layer and it doesn't change the forwarding plane. It does create a mapping state at the end-nodes. So claiming it to be either is probably wrong.

- kurtis -