Re: Ideas for IPv6 BGP and tunnelling

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2009-04-24 20:52, Eric Levy-Abegnoli wrote:
> Brian,
> Brian E Carpenter a écrit :
>> Ole,
>>
>> On 2009-04-24 01:02, Ole Troan wrote:
>>  
>>>> But I fear there so far the idea hasn't gotten much traction. In
>>>> fact, the
>>>> RFC4798 predecessor documents [1] included ability to set up tunnels
>>>> over
>>>> GRE and similar non-MPLS encapsulations.  This was explicitly _removed_
>>>> because the solution was targeted at MPLS networks, not as a general
>>>> purpose
>>>> BGP-signalled tunneling mechanism.
>>>>
>>>> [1] take a look at e.g:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ooms-v6ops-bgp-tunnel-00
>>>>       
>>> I thought 6PE and BGP tunnelling got split into separate documents?
>>> obviously my memory isn't serving me right.
>>>     
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ngtrans-bgp-tunnel-04.txt
>> (thankyou Google)
>>
>> I don't recall why that never became an RFC.
>>   
> That sort of became RFC4798, with focus on MPLS tunnelling

Exactly; the non-MPLS methods were thrown away, although they
seem to be completely valid. Why isn't there an informational
or BCP RFC describing them? It really seems like a gap.

    Brian