[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Re: [RAM] Different approaches for different protocols
You do realize this requires a lot of site changes. Readdressing
routers and doing longest match after the 6 bytes. Then the
question is what if you want to use variable length subnet masks
across your domain, etc.
Yes, certainly anyone who has v6 already deployed would be
inconvenienced. However, I'm not willing to sacrifice the
architecture of the net to grandfather those few folks in forever.
If they want to play, they should renumber.
Again, we can start in a specific prefix so that we can have
interoperability and have a rolling migration. However, everyone
*should* play the same game, eventually.
And the router changes to do a different type of longest match?
And in the ETR case, the forwarding algorithm is different as well.
Because you have to tell your FIB to match on high-order bits only to
determine the packet needs to be translated.
GSE "appears" to be a good idea but the devil is in the details. Could
be completely different for host-based GSE.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.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