Excerpts from Lixia Zhang at 22:56:42 -0700 on Mon 31 Mar 2008: > On Mar 31, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Gang Chen wrote: > > Dear Tony and Lixia: > > May I ask you question about ITR and ETR deployment location? > > In the LISP draft-farinacci-lisp-06.txt, both CE and PE router can > > be used for tunnel endpionts. I wonder to know where is the optimal > > location to reduce router table size in DFZ greatly?
> *personal* view: > - the exact location of tunnel end point (PE or CE), I believe, does > have an impact on the details of a design, and more importantly, on > the incremental rollout (if interested, you may want to take a look of > the APT incremental deployment presentation slides from Philly meeting) The more we take these ideas and try to apply them to real life operations, the more we realize how helpful coordination among xTRs is. In order for a site to be able to coordinate behavior of its xTRs, to any degree and in any way it chooses, it is good to have them under the site's direct control. I don't believe we can predict or should control how a site's xTRs will need to work together -- they might do something surprising. So I don't think a site should depend on inter-provider cooperation. That means I believe that it's better to place xTR functionality in CEs. Scott -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
