nanog mailing list archives
Re: IXP
From: kris foster <kris.foster () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:04:24 -0700
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Arnold Nipper wrote:
On 17.04.2009 20:52 Paul Vixie wrotewith the advent of vlan tags, the whole idea of CSMA for IXP networks is passe. just put each pair of peers into their own private tagged vlan and let one of them allocate a V4 /30 and a V6 /64 for it. as a bonus, this prevents third party BGP (which nobody really liked which sometimes got turned on by mistake) and prevents transit dumping and/or "pointing default at" someone. the IXP no longer needs any address space, they're just a VPN provider. shared-switchconnections are just virtual crossconnects.Large IXP have >300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags, wouldn't you?
QinQ could solve this Kris
Current thread:
- IXP Sharlon R. Carty (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP bmanning (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Elmar K. Bins (Apr 17)
- RE: IXP Ivan Pepelnjak (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Bill Woodcock (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP kris foster (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP kris foster (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI bmanning (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Antonio Querubin (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Joe Greco (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI bmanning (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- RE: IXP Ivan Pepelnjak (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)