RE: Reducing Peerings for MH Routing within a site via end systems

["Tony Li" <Tony.Li@procket.com>]

Title: Message

If a host has multiple locators and a single identifier and other hosts are able to change

the locator that they are using at will, then it implies that special routing information

about that site need not be propagated upwards.  Effectively, the site has PA space

from each of its providers and that PA space is nicely aggregated in global routing.

 

Yes, this makes MHH's much nicer for global routing, tho it may still lead to issues

with local routing.  Kinda depends what you want to do within your IGP.  One could

reasonably argue that you take the layer of separation down recursively.

 

Note that this alleviates the most painful reason to avoid PA space: renumbering is

now a non-issue.  You assign a new locator to your entire site, advertise it to the

world and you're good to go.  Individual host identifiers need not change.  No host

renumbering.

 

Tony

 

 

Do we agree on the following (I don't care about the high order words/terms).

 

Reducing Peering:

 

If a sites end systems do not depend on providers peering, but can always failover to other provider from within the site, this reduces the routing tables for the providers, and for the routers within the Internet in the MHH case?

 

Would this solve an immediate problem from IPv6 MHH case?