[99628] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT v6->v4 and v4->v6 (was Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Per Heldal)
Sun Sep 30 04:42:23 2007
From: Per Heldal <heldal@eml.cc>
To: Mark Smith <nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20070930114023.dd552de5.nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 10:41:01 +0200
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 11:40 +0930, Mark Smith wrote:
> The model we're talking about seems to me to be that old model on
> it's head. The devices at the edge of the core network are fully aware
> of the underlying topology of the core network so they can make
> informed forwarding decisions. The tunnelling encapsulation only serves
> the purpose of transporting protocols/payloads, that aren't native in
> the core, from edge-to-edge. The tunnelling function doesn't try to
> control or have to take responsibility for the selecting paths taken
> across the core.
This is just is a slight move of the core/edge boundary. Core switching
capabilities (MPLS) have been added to edge devices which were pure
terminal-devices from an ATM-perspective. The MPLS-cloud is just as
obscure as ATM to a non-MPLS-speaking IP-device.
//per
