Am 2013-11-01 13:45, schrieb Sander Steffann:
Hi,
I want to ask everyone on the list: Which facts prevent a scaling
experiment with the aim of global production state? In my opinion a
/16-EID-prefix is perfect for that goal.
The problem is in that what you describe depends on public PITRs, and
we have seen how badly that worked for 6to4 public relays. Running a
public relay costs money (equipment, maintenance, bandwidth), and when
nobody pays for them then we cannot expect any decent quality. And
LISP will be blamed and seen as an unreliable protocol, just like
6to4. Relying on public relays is a very bad idea.
Now, if some big tier-1 transit networks start running production
quality PxTRs (because PxTRs attract traffic, and their customers pay
for traffic) then I can see some possibilities. If the LISP traffic
volume increases then other networks might also start running PxTRs so
they don't have to pay their transits for it, and then we are getting
somewhere. But as long as 'public PxTR' means 'someone with good
intentions but no real responsibility' then this will be a dangerous
experiment for LISP...
That's an important argument.
We shouldn't rule out public PITRs because of the huge traffic to be
expected, provide a /16 EID-block and hope it will attract operators of
backbones and internet exchanges. Maybe we can define some Quality of
Service rules for PITRs to discourage fun installations with low
quality.
Best regards,
Renne
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
