On 10/12/22 07:34, Masataka Ohta wrote:
: IPv6 with unnecessarily lengthy 16B addresses without valid : technical reasoning only to make network operations prohibitively : painful is a garbage protocol. : : LISP, which perform ID to locator mapping, which is best : performed by DNS, in a lot less scalable way than DNS : is a garbage protocol.
Perhaps your feedback would be more generally useful if you described, in technical terms, why you believe DNS is a better ID-to-locator mapping than LISP is. I'm personally not terribly offended by your use of the word "garbage", but it tells me nothing about why you prefer alternatives.
(I personally see a lot of technical problems with using DNS as an ID-to-locator mapping protocol, due to lack of speed, security, and reliability if not very robustly provisioned. I'm not even convinced that an ID/locator separation is desirable. I haven't tried to evaluate LISP in many years, so my opinions of that protocol suite are too old to be useful.)
Keith
