god
/0\ <---- this is an eyeball
+-----------------------------------------+
|Ubernet |
| +-------------------------+ |
| | | |
| | Mynet | |
| | +-------+ | |
| | |Hernet | | |
| | | | | |
| | +-------+ | |
| +-------------------------+ |
| |
| +-------------------------+ |
| | | |
| | Theirnet | |
| | +-------+ | |
| | |Hisnet | | |
| | +-------+ | |
| +-------------------------+ |
+-----------------------------------------+
How many Intra-domains and Inter-Domain boundaries are there? I haven't
even drawn lines of communication. If all you are doing is saying that
Inter/Intra defines a boundary of control *FOR A GIVEN FRAME OF REFERENCE*
or scope, then its like arguing apples and meatloaf.
From Dietys-eye-view, a 2-domain terminology is weak. A 2-domain model
of routing is weak. Surely, for some abstraction or discription, it *has*
to be n-way and I think Frank is suggesting there might be a goal or
a requirement to try and achieve a single *architecture* for routing across
all n domains.
-George
-------
George Michaelson | APNIC
Email: ggm@apnic.net | PO Box 2131 Milton QLD 4064
Phone: +61 7 3367 0490 | Australia
Fax: +61 7 3367 0482 | http://www.apnic.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:03 EDT