On 8/9/2016 6:28 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > Joe, > > In the past 15+ years, I haven't seen this limitation going away.
If you want to base a limitation on a prediction of future hardware, then do that. But don't simply base it on existing hardware. There's zero point to an RFC that is outdated before it is published. > It is expensive to pass the whole packet through the packet forwarding > logic. No disagreement, but that doesn't necessarily mean that future hardware will be as shallow into the packet as current hardware either. > ... > > Given that this is frequently a basic attribute of a system's > architecture, expecting > it to change drastically to handle an encapsulation without stunning > technical advantage > is rather unlikely. But that's exactly what I do expect. Encapsulation is becoming more prevalent, as is DPI. The deeper things get, the deeper hardware WILL end up looking into the packet. I understand making the system easy to implement in hardware in general, but we really need to NOT design protocols that are obsolete even before the ink is dry. Joe _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
