> -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 代表 Christian Vogt > 发送时间: 2008年4月15日 21:16 > 收件人: Brian E Carpenter > 抄送: William Herrin; Routing Research Group Mailing List > 主题: Re: [RRG] Which Side to Control Ingress Link Selection? > > >> Doesn't the issue persist independent of the characteristics based on > >> which a path gets selected? Independent of *how* a path gets > >> selected, > >> you need to decide *who* selects it (or who selects which part of > >> it). > > > > Well, that's true of course. But nothing can change the fact > > that the originating host chooses the source address and destination > > address that the packet starts out with, and all subsequent choices > > depend on that. > > Brian, > > fully agree, but my point is that our new routing architecture may give > more control to the sender: By selecting a transit address in addition > to an edge address, the sender will be able to fix an intermediate > point on the route towards the receiver. Thereby, it will be able to > select the ingress link at the receiving edge network. Today, it is the > /receiving/ edge network that selects the ingress link -- through BGP.
Christian, It seems related to the approach I mentioned earlier in this mailing-list, that is, hosts implement EID-RLOC mapping query and carry the RLOC in the outgoing packets, the ITR just needs to encapsulate and forward them according to the RLOC piggybacked in the packets. Xiaohu XU -- 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
