On 2010-05-04 07:34, Darrel Lewis wrote: > Shim6 is very different from LISP. Shim6 is implemented in the host, and > LISP in the CPE router (like, for example, NAT66 would be). Shim6 seems to > have more in common to ILNP than LISP.
That's true if your helicopter is hovering at about 250 metres. But if you take it up to half a kilometre, all these solutions are isomorphic, in the sense that prefixes for multimhomed sites are no longer visible in BGP4; whether they are eliminated in the host or at the ISP ingress doesn't matter to the core. The one property that separates stateless NAT66 (which is not NAPT) from shim6, ILNP and LISP is that the end to end address as seen by transport protocols gets changed. However, I agree with Fred: on *this* list we should talk about draft-mrw-behave-nat66. We could start with a naming competition. Brian _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
