Re: [RRG] Renumbering...

[Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>]

> If PI is available, then all users will tend to cling to it,  
> avoiding any
> other possible solution.  Our entire job is to give them an  
> alternative.

No not true. Since PI addressing is so popular and saves so much in  
opex, we should come up with a solution that allows or embraces it.

Let them cling to it, they have stated the desire to use them, let's  
just keep them out of core routing. You can't beat their arguments.

We have said this many times before in LISP fora, PI addresses used at  
sites are the EID-prefixes that map to topologically aggregatable  
locators.

This is what we are doing in the LISP testbed by using IPv4 EID- 
prefixes from PI block 153.16.0.0/16 and IPv6 EID-prefixes from PI  
block 2610:00d0::/32.

IMO, this is a solved problem. All we need is a lot more testing and  
some deployment experience.

Dino


--
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