Dino,
I am not understanding your response. Let me ask the question another way.
Assume that an operator deploys a PITR. What policy can that operator enforce
to ensure that it is compensated for all (or even most) of the traffic that it
carries across that PITR?
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 11:44 AM
> To: Ronald Bonica
> Cc: Luigi Iannone; Geoff Huston; Sander Steffann; LISP mailing list
> list
> Subject: Re: [lisp] WGLC draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-07
>
> > Luigi,
> >
> > Is this really what is going to happen?
> >
> > If a PITR announces the entire /32 into the global Internet, it puts
> itself on the forwarding path for the entire /32, and incurs the cost
> associated with transporting traffic towards every site in that /32.
> This is supportable only if the PITR operator is somehow compensated
> for carrying all of that traffic.
>
> But maybe only from a few sources. But if the /32 needs to be divided
> based on region, then maybe /40s could be advertised. But to the point
> about "few sources", the more PITRs there are, the better the load is
> shared.
>
> And I envision PITRs will be deployed on on-path boxes anyways. Those
> boxes right now can route to the entire Internet, they are called PE
> boxes, are they not Ron?
>
> > Isn't it more likely that the PITR operator will advertise only
> slices of the /32, with each of those slices being assigned to either
> its customers (from whom it collects revenue) or the customers of other
> operators with whom it has made financial arrangements?
>
> No it won't be that way. EIDs are provider independent. If you do what
> we suggest, we make no forward progress.
>
> Dino
>
> >
> > Ron
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
