Re: An idea: GxSE

["Paul Francis" <yoid2000@home.com>]

>
> 1. Somebody asked how to allocate the SK prefix. This is easy enough to
> do in several ways, but a painless way is to use the site's RFC 3056
> prefix, at least for the first ten years or so of allocations.

This works too.

>
> 2. Paul says that sites would have to renumber when they merge. I'm not
> convinced that is a requirement. If two sites with different SK prefixes
> merge, it seems to me they can simply route between those two prefixes
> internally. Even if renumbering turns out to be a good idea in the long
> term, it can be done piecewise - no flag day needed.

The problem is not internal routing, but external.  If you continue to use
different GR prefixes for the two merged halves after merge, then you don't
have to do anything...just leak internal prefixes into the opposite half as
you suggest---so at least you avoid the flag day.

If you do want both halves to use the same GR prefixes, which sooner or
later you might, then the site border routers need to know how to translate
incoming packets.  If both halves use the same SLA's, then the only way the
border router can know how to do that is by keeping a list of individual
hosts and thier prefixes.  Still kindof doable---the site border router can
get a dump from DNS or something---but not what you'd want.  So eventually
you do have to do some renumbering when sites merge.  But at least this is
not at the whim of your ISP...

>
> Apart from that I am worried about the amount of complexity you are asking
> hosts to implement. For some types of host (e.g. handhelds) this will be
an
> issue. I think there could be a simplified version of GxSE lurking in
there
> somewhere.
>

There is a tradeoff here.  If you did GSxE, then you might be able to avoid
some of the existing multiple addresses complexity in the handheld...i.e.,
one SK address instead of several global addresses.  Obviously too early to
know the trade-offs.

PF