On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 17:03 -1000, John Zwiebel wrote: > > Much of the aggregation happens just by deploying LISP/ALT since the > route advertised into the ALT by the xTR is already aggregated.
But then there is no need for a heirarchy right? We could get the same benefits by having a set of public-use routers that can return map replies, peered in a flat format. The motivation behind a heirarchical structure for the ALT-LAT was aggressive aggregation, which leads to the issues articulated by Brian, where globally-spread sites have to send all map requests through one geographical point, leading to some major stretch. However John, you're right that IF edge sites are willing to use LISP's TE methods, they won't have to prefix split for TE. This means 1 prefix per edge site, which is better than today. But then, as I said, we can get the same benefit without an ALT tree. Dan Jen _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
