[e2e] tunnels with only one end point specified.

Craig Partridge craig at aland.bbn.com
Thu May 11 09:01:32 PDT 2006

Hi Jon:

I don't quite get the motivation.

How is prior agreement with a peer endpoint harder than negotiating with
all the possible ANYCAST recipients?


In message <E1FeCH8-0000yU-00 at mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk>, Jon Crowcroft writes:

>so has anyone considered how you might design an ip tunnel
>system with only having to specify ONE end point of the tunnel 
>motivation: the
>big problem with tunnels is that you have to nail TWO ends
>which means you need a lot of prior agreement, and as we know,
>distributred agreement is NP hard (neocon-politically hard)
>so how about tunnels where the encapsulating header uses an ANY CAST
>address for one end (either - nearest, or furthest)?
>next: underhandover overloy networks -  technique that allies 
>mobileip and ron:)
>on closer examination, the object was nearer than when first observed.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list