[86073] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: design of a real routing v. endpoint id seperation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Oct 21 17:09:27 2005
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:08:43 -0700
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Andre Oppermann <nanog-list@nrg4u.com>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <43591AC0.9020004@nrg4u.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--==========84FD770136DB4399F778==========
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
> There is not only the multihoming issue but also the PI address issue.
> Even if any ISP would run his network very competently and there
> were no outages we would face the ISP switching issue. Again we
> would end up with either PI addresses announced by the ISP or BGP
> by the customer. With either the DFZ continues to grow. There is
> just no way around it.
The way around it is to stop growing the DFZ routing table by the size
of the Prefixes. If customers could have PI addreses and the DFZ
routing table was based, instead, on ASNs in such a way that customers
could use their upstream's ASNs and not need their own, then, provider
switch would be a change to the PI->ASN mapping and not affect the
DFZ table at all.
Owen
--
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
--==========84FD770136DB4399F778==========
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFDWVjbn5zKWQ/iqj0RAreLAJ0T6eE0Sfz6Q1nFz3UBT69sEqOzCgCeIhp0
GwM/eouLOz9ZaVtZkcUFzXU=
=aqVU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==========84FD770136DB4399F778==========--
