[124630] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: legacy /8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (George Bonser)
Fri Apr 2 22:53:48 2010
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 19:53:14 -0700
In-Reply-To: <F5FA56AC5C364E3F9194C80A53F7D869@TAKA>
From: "George Bonser" <gbonser@seven.com>
To: "John Palmer (NANOG Acct)" <nanog2@adns.net>,
<nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) [mailto:nanog2@adns.net]
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:29 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: legacy /8
>=20
> Is someone volunteering to work on an RFC? Or, has someone done so
for
> this already?
I have never heard of anything along that line. It is just something
that has wandered through my mind from time to time wondering why nobody
had ever done such a thing as it seems so easy. All you need is to
increase the standard transit MTU a little bit so your encapsulation
doesn't result in a bunch of additional packet fragmentation due to the
encap overhead and create the new DNS AA RR and that would be about all
that is required.=20
If your network is an end user, you just announce one route ... your ASN
... to your transit providers and any peers. A transit operation
announces their ASN and any they are collecting from peers. =20
They hard part is getting all the end nodes to use IPIP tunneling as
their primary protocol by default. It is doable but that is the hard
part. =20
