Subject: Re: provider-int geo aggr [Re: plug: thesis on site multihoming]

From: "Michael H. Lambert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:26:53 -0500

Iljitsch,

--On Monday, 31 March 2003 09:17 +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> What's so hard to understand??? In the US you create an aggregate route
> for the US address block and you accept /48s for US destinations. In
> Europe, you create an aggregate for the European address block and accept
> /48s for European destinations. So when you have a packet in the US that
> needs to go to a European destination, you don't have a /48 route so the
> packet is routed to Europe by means of the aggregate. In Europe, the
> packet is routed further as per the /48 that is in the routing tables of
> European routers. Rinse, repeat.

Do you think it reasonable to have (at least) two DFZs--one using PA 
addresses and the other using PI addresses?  Presumably, there would be a 
large number of interconnects between the DFZs.  Even if there are known 
problems in multihoming with PA addresses, I think there is too large a 
base to get rid of them.

Michael