Hello, I'd like to announce that an update to the IRON architecture draft is now available, along with updates to the functional specifications for its constituent mechanisms VET and SEAL:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-iron-02 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-vet http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-seal IRON now has what I believe to be a compelling new solution that supports: - portable PI - mobility - multihoming - route optimization - traffic engineering - multi-protocol operation - tunnel MTU determination - other neat stuff IRON now suggests that a new business model supporting PI addressing will emerge. In the new model, companies that hold highly-aggregated Virtual Prefixes (VPs) will lease portions of their VPs to End User Networks (EUNs) which can then use them as ISP-independent PI prefixes. Each EUN registers a PI-prefix-to-ISP mapping with its parent VP company's network. The VP company's network then serves as a virtual "home network", and the EUN appears as a mobile network that is always away from home. The EUN can change its mapping to use a different ISP at any time such that mobility and multihoming are naturally supported. This new approach specifically focuses on small EUNs that are either mobile or connect through multiple ISPs (this is the same class of EUNs that have led to the routing scaling concerns that brought on the RRG interest in the first place.) Larger and more fixed networks (e.g., large enterprise networks, service provider networks, etc.) will instead announce their prefixes into the IPv4 and/or IPv6 DFZs the same as they have always done. Please take a moment to take a look at the materials and post any comments or questions. I would also like to request that the chairs now consider IRON as a candidate for publication as an IRTF-stream RFC. Thanks - Fred [email protected] _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
