[e2e] administrative domains and the network layer
kruse at ohio.edu
Tue Jun 5 07:40:40 PDT 2001
The issue of administrative boundaries has, IMHO, indeed led to some of the
end-to-end "violations". However, in my (limited) understanding of IPv6 I
thought that the provider-based prefixes coupled with proper
autoconfiguration should solve most of the routing issues as well as the
renumbering issues. Multihoming remains a problem.
I am not sure how the autonomous system concept would help the multihoming
issue, since in that case the "autonomous system" describes the upstream
provider, which is different for the two paths out of the users network.
--On Monday, June 4, 2001 23:44 -0700 Ben Black <ben at layer8.net> wrote:
> If the autonomous system concept were to be introduced into the
> definition of the network layer, I see the opportunity to truly decouple
> host identity from network topology (this is not the same as trusting the
> host, as I believe issues of trust are well beyond the scope of the
> network layer), which in turn opens the door to far simplified and
> scalable routing architectures (whether they use something akin to GSE,
> NAT, or a completely new approach).
> I am interested in whatever opinions you might have on the subject.
Hans Kruse, Associate Professor
McClure School of Communication Systems Management, Ohio University
740-593-4891 voice, 740-593-4889 fax
More information about the end2end-interest