On 6 mar 2006, at 11.10, Per Heldal wrote:
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 13:35:02 +0100, "Kurt Erik Lindqvist" <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se> 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 3...
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 -