[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[RRG] 答复: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection?
> 发件人: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] 代表 Christian Vogt
> 发送时间: 2008年4月15日 21:16
> 收件人: Brian E Carpenter
> 抄送: William Herrin; Routing Research Group Mailing List
> 主题: Re: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection?
> >> Doesn't the issue persist independent of the characteristics based on
> >> which a path gets selected? Independent of *how* a path gets
> >> selected,
> >> you need to decide *who* selects it (or who selects which part of
> >> it).
> > Well, that's true of course. But nothing can change the fact
> > that the originating host chooses the source address and destination
> > address that the packet starts out with, and all subsequent choices
> > depend on that.
> fully agree, but my point is that our new routing architecture may give
> more control to the sender: By selecting a transit address in addition
> to an edge address, the sender will be able to fix an intermediate
> point on the route towards the receiver. Thereby, it will be able to
> select the ingress link at the receiving edge network. Today, it is the
> /receiving/ edge network that selects the ingress link -- through BGP.
It seems related to the approach I mentioned earlier in this mailing-list,
that is, hosts implement EID-RLOC mapping query and carry the RLOC in the
outgoing packets, the ITR just needs to encapsulate and forward them
according to the RLOC piggybacked in the packets.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org 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