Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!ETN-WLV.EATON.COM!mcc
From: mcc@ETN-WLV.EATON.COM (Merton Campbell Crockett)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  Dumb vs. smart host routing
Message-ID: <8805141610.AA04585@ETN-WLV.EATON.COM>
Date: 14 May 88 16:10:36 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 8

Binding connections to routes is not necessarily bad.  Binding connections
to routes will probably be a necessity if, and when, multi-level security
is implemented.  Not all gateways, hosts, etc. may be accredited to service
a transmission at a given security level.  Which we lead to some requirement
for a node to be able to request of each node in a path "can you provide me
this class (type) of service at this security level?"

Merton