Hi Fred, It is good to see this discussion, but an alternative approach that should also be considered is tunneling. In the IRON approach at least, the end user network gets a stable IPv6 prefix that is independent of the access network IP addresses it gets from its ISPs. So, there is no need for source address-based forwarding to ensure that packets sent via ISP A will not have a source address from ISP B.
The use cases for tunneling are very broad, and probably overlap with the ones you are considering in this approach. The relevant documents are here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-ironbis http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-vet http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-templin-intarea-seal Thanks - Fred [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Fred Baker (fred) > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:45 AM > To: Routing WG; [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] Group; [email protected] WG > Subject: [v6ops] Tsinghua work on source/destination routing > > I'd like to draw your attention to a talk that will be given this morning in > homenet. The context is: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-baker-rtgwg-src-dst-routing-use-cases > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-rtgwg-src-dst-routing-use-cases > "Requirements and Use Cases for Source/Destination Routing", Fred Baker, > 2013-08-13 > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xu-homenet-traffic-class > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-homenet-traffic-class > "Traffic Class Routing Protocol in Home Networks", Mingwei Xu, Shu Yang, > Jianping Wu, Fred Baker, 2013-10-21 > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xu-homenet-twod-ip-routing > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-homenet-twod-ip-routing > "Two Dimensional-IP Routing Protocol in Home Networks", Mingwei Xu, Shu > Yang, Jianping Wu, Dan Wang, 2013-08-22 > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing > "IPv6 Source/Destination Routing using OSPFv3", Fred Baker, 2013-08-28 > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend > "OSPFv3 LSA Extendibility", Acee Lindem, Sina Mirtorabi, Abhay Roy, Fred > Baker, 2013-10-15 > > I had breakfast this morning with Shu Yang, who has been writing Quagga code > for several years in the > course of his PHd. He first implemented a source/destination model, reported > on in draft-xu-homenet- > twod-ip-routing, which was an MTR scheme. He tells me he found that very > complex. He also listened to > my talk in homenet around draft-baker-fun-routing-class, and has now > implemented (if I understand him > correctly) draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend and > draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing. The FIB > implementation has a limitation: the source prefixes must be disjoint. > However, given that, he has two > FIB implementations, one of which has separate FIBs for each source prefix in > play including ::/0 (so > if there are M prefixes in the network, M+1 FIBs), and one of which is a > single hierarchical M-Trie > that looks up the destination and then the source. He has tested the code in > simulation; the next step > is testing in live networks. > > Examples of use cases are generally around multi-prefix campus networks. > There is a security use case > that could be of value; at IETF 87, George Michaelson of APNIC reported on > ULAs seen in his darknet. > The short report is that he sees a fair bit of traffic with a ULA source > address on the backbone. An > interesting potential use of source/destination routing would counter that, > and perhaps mitigate the > need for ISP BCP 38 if generally deployed; in a case where a network is using > a ULA and a global > prefix (e.g., is not multihomed but has two prefixes, one of which is > intended to only be used within > its network), the default route to the network egress would use the global > prefix as a source, and as > a result traffic sent outside the network with a ULA source prefix would in > effect have no route. The > network could literally only emit traffic from its correct prefix. > > I think this is relevant to the discussion of > draft-baker-rtgwg-src-dst-routing-use-cases > draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend > draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing > draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
