[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] anycast/default as a transition tool [On the Transitionability of LISP]
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Christian Vogt wrote:
(The reason one needs anycast IDs is to let multiple alternative
providers perform the same remote mapping for an edge network. Unicast
IDs would bind the remote mapping to a single provider. This would
create a dependency of the edge network on that provider, which is
exactly what we want to avoid with multi-homing.)
The anycast model would (AFAICS) be similar if not identical to
advertising a default route to the non-upgraded networks.
In fact, that is already somewhat common in today's Internet's smaller
providers which don't want/need to carry the full BGP table.
Both anycast and default route also have similar failure modes, i.e.,
if a default/anycast route is advertised by a router which doesn't
have full topology information (or at least a lead where to forward
the packets to get it), connectivity of Internet is going to be
balkanized depending on which anycast/default you happen to be using.
Maybe we don't need a solution at the edges, just more default routing
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg