Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Dave Howe wrote: I believe I mentioned geographic routing (which is actually switching, and not routing) so your packets get delivered, as the crow flies. The question of name services. How often do you actually use a domain name as an end user? Not very often. People typically use a search engine. It doesn't matter how the URI looks like, as long as it can be clicked on, or is short enough to be cut and pasted, or written down on a piece of paper and entered manually, in a pinch. ah. Sorry, I don't think of dns as a name service (apart from once removed) - we are talking DHCP or similar routable-address assignment.
under ipv6 you can avoid having to have a explicit naming service - the You obviously understand under naming service something other than DNS. yup - I recognise anything as a naming service that allows you to associate a routable name with a node that otherwise has only a mac address;
Anything which relies on global routing tables and their refresh will always has an issue. Which is why geographical local-knowledge routing will dominate global networks. Indeed so - but of course the current internet *does* work that way, so any new solution that advertises itself as "Free Internet access" *must* fit into the current scheme or it is worthless.
The best solution would seem to leave the multilingual node the choice of means of delivery. It would be completely transparent to the packet. Unfortunately, such abstraction fails unless the *sender* knows how to push the packet in the right direction, and each hop knows how to get it a little nearer; this more or less requires that each node be given a unique identifier compatable with the existing system, and given the existing system is still ipv4, there are problems.