Re: A tunneling proposal

[Ramakrishna Gummadi <ramki@cs.berkeley.edu>]

> One of
> the desireable features of current IPv4 multihoming is the ability to
solve
> for "local" connectivity loss (local-loop/router failure) via "local"
> redundancy.

To elaborate a little more, I think
tunnels can be used to survive "not-so-local" failures in the ISP
(such as exchange
point resets, as mentioned in the requirements draft).
The amount of co-operation required can be a function of the performance
requirements (in terms of tunneled traffic carried), as well as
how many possible alternate paths should be explored---for example, a
naive yet simple way to set up a tunnel between the site and ISPB without
requiring
any co-operation from ISPA is for the site's border router to try a
pre-determined list of exit points within ISPB.


thanks,
ramki