Its certainly one, but as Joel said, not the only, way one could envision global deployment of PxTRs. Another one is that regional LISP mapping providers announce their customer's (PI) EID prefixes. In the latter case, the gains to the global routing systems are modest, but at least individual sites are not deaggregating for TE purposes.
-Darrel On Dec 5, 2013, at 8:06 AM, Ronald Bonica <[email protected]> wrote: > Sander, > > I think that what you are saying is true. Do folks agree? > > Ron > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sander Steffann [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 2:02 AM >> To: Dino Farinacci >> Cc: Ronald Bonica; Luigi Iannone; Geoff Huston; LISP mailing list list >> Subject: Re: [lisp] WGLC draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-07 >> >> Hi, >> >>> As I said before, the /32 advertisements of an EID-block are >> advertised within an ISP towards the edges of the network. Those edges >> are towards its customers so its customers, as sources in non-LISP >> sites, can reach destinations in LISP sites. >> >> So if it is only done this way, that means for global reachability of >> the LISP prefix at least one global transit provider has to run PITRs. >> They wouldn't mind attracting the traffic from their customers. That is >> what they are paid for :-) That would make it work, *if* we can >> convince the big transit(s). >> >> Cheers, >> Sander >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
