On 5/28/08 6:11 PM, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote:
3 - The solution must provide portable address space for end-user networks without impacting the scaling of the current BGP routing system. (The map-encap schemes do this.)I don't agree. The desire for "portable" prefixes is an artefact of IPv4 experience. Let me reformulate. The solution must allow the option of provider-independent address space and the option of multiple provider-dependent address spaces for end-user networks...
It doesn't even need to do that. It should allow multihoming and easy migration from one point in the topology to another. How it does that is an open question.
-- 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