> BGP is bound between two IP addresses. When the IP addresses change
> the BGP peering is lost.
This is a valid point, which has already been discussed many times on
the list, but is not discussed or even alluded to in RFC 2283. The
solution in IGPs is to use link-local addresses for exchanging IGP
packets; this means that the "peering" in RIP, OSPF or IS-IS will
survive renumbering. This solution is not entirely applicable to BGP.
However, we can probably use a combination of the following:
1) Use of link local addresses when BGP peers are directly connected.
2) Use of site-local addresses when BGP peers belong to the same site.
3) Use of mobile-IP solutions so that TCP survives renumbering.
4) Use of IPv4 addresses in multi-protocol environments.
Each of these solutions is partial, and requires work, e.g. discovery
that peers are on the same link, or in the same site. I would argue that
this type of work is typical of the implementation phase that we are
entering, and should be conducted by pragmatists (the IDR working group)
rather than explorers (IPNG).
-- Christian Huitema
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
