[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection?



Hannu,

you are too far ahead. :-)  I was still thinking on the incentives/
economic level.  Whether we decide that an ingress link should be
selected by the receiving side or by the sending side, I am sure we will
eventually find a good technique for it.  But let's first decide which
approach would be preferable.  (Feedback from the receiving side, as you
mention, will certainly be necessary if we decide that the receiving
side should select its ingress links.)

But you seem to be in favor of letting the receiving side select.  Is
this right?  And if yes, please elaborate what makes you think so.

- Christian



hannu.flinck@nsn.com wrote:
 Hello

I am wondering what triggers the egress indirection router to require fresh reachability information for a receiving edge? Doesn't this imply that the receiving edge indicates the need somehow?
All this sounds quite complicated and fragile if communication between
ingress and egress and mapping system is needed to accomplish something
that is already working through BGP.
Why not just manage the tunnel end points between egress and ingress
routers? If either of the tunnel end points want to change local their
end point (in an managed way, not due to a failure), they will signal to
their intention to the other end and let the remote side know what would
be the "next" tunnel end point.
Maybe I am missing something here but how could the sending side know
better what the receiving side wants?


Regards Hannu




--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com 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