nanog mailing list archives
Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)
From: "Elmar K. Bins" <elmi () 4ever de>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:41:20 +0200
drc () virtualized org (David Conrad) wrote:
I'm suggesting not mucking with the packet format anymore. It might be ugly, but it can be made to work until somebody comes up with IPv7. Instead, since the locator/identifier split wasn't done in the protocol, do the split in _operation_.
It has been done a long time ago, IMHO. I wonder whether I am the only one seeing this, but we already have a (albeit routing-) locator (ASN) and an identifier (IP address), that are pretty much distinct and where the routing locator is not used inside the "local" network, but only outside. There's your edge/core boundary. Every multi-homer will be needing their own ASN, so that's what clutters up your routing tables. It's economy there. Btw, a lot of ASNs advertise one network only. People surely think multihoming is important to them (and I cannot blame them for that). Hierarchical routing is one possible solution, with a lot of drawbacks and problems. Forget about geographic hierarchies; there's always people who do not peer. Visibility radius limitation is another (I cannot believe the idea is new, I only don't know what it's called). Cheers, Elmi. -- "Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren." (PLemken, <bu6o7e$e6v0p$2 () ID-31 news uni-berlin de>) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
Current thread:
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news), (continued)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) bmanning (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Randy Bush (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Randy Bush (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Michael . Dillon (Oct 18)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Per Heldal (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Per Heldal (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Paul Jakma (Oct 17)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Paul Vixie (Oct 16)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) David Conrad (Oct 18)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Elmar K. Bins (Oct 18)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Tony Li (Oct 18)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) David Conrad (Oct 18)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Per Heldal (Oct 19)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 16)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news) Paul Vixie (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Paul Vixie (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 news David Conrad (Oct 18)