Re: A tunneling proposal

["Jon (Taz) Mischo" <taz@tazlore.com>]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Paul Francis wrote:

> > As for GxSE's behavior in the multi-level multihoming scenario,
> > I think Paul is probably the best person to
> > answer this, as I am not certain how the site border router knows to
> > signal the upstream provider's router to attach the address-list extension
> > header.
> >
> 
> The signalling is done by the end host...the end host attaches an extension
> that is basically a placeholder for the prefix-list that the site border
> router fills in.

> I hadn't considered the multi-level case.  My first thought is that the site
> border router should be configured to know of the multiple upstream
> prefixes, although this does open up the problem of having to reconfigure
> all of the site border routers when the mom&pop ISP decides to
> change/add/delete its upstream ISP...

This is required anyway, so it's not a big deal.  Besides, as I said
before, if you propagate some of this information into routing, such
changes can be less painful.

-Taz

-- 
        "Be liberal in what you accept,
      and conservative in what you send."
--Jon Postel (1943-1998) RFC 1122, October 1989