Hi Heiner,
So, during this tunneling phase, it seems like the database is
O(N^2) in
the number of possible links.
No. Take an OSPF-network with N nodes and with n EBGP-TARA-nodes
(N>>n) being the interfaces to the outside internet. It will contribute
approx. 2n to 3n loose links which interconnect these n
EBGP-TARA-nodes(assuming that this ISP network doesn't want to disclose
any knowledge about its internal topological structure). And this is
true in general: if there are n nodes, the computation of the
interconnecting links will determine about 2n to 3n links.
But that implies that your external routing will be massively suboptimal
with respect to other proposals where you can tunnel directly to the ETR.
Suppose that a geopatch has only a single TARA-router in it. It then
becomes the decapsulator for all TARA traffic arriving into that
geopatch. Who pays for this router? Who pays to deliver traffic from
this router to the destination access ISP?
What is precisely the scenario ? You pressume that the destination EID
has a TARA-locator, being put into the DNS by some non-TARA-router ????:-(
No, again, there's a single TARA-router. I'm interested in the topology
and routing internal to the geopatch. This is the problematic area for
all geo-aggregation proposals.
Again, if the TARA-router is not part of the interconnect and all local
ISPs do not participate in the interconnect, then you would seem to have
a connectivity issue.
Again, the horse must come before the carriage - or do I
misunderstanding something?
One of us certainly does. ;-) There must be some local interconnect.
This is where the economic issues come into play.
Tony
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
