Le 06/12/2019 à 17:21, Sander Steffann a écrit :
Hi Robert,
To your specific first question this is very popular deployment
model ... just look at SDWANs. So Internet is just a L3 transport
for all routers in your administrative domain or global WAN. Spot
on. I do sincerely hope that whatever the result be of this debate
all features will be legal to run on my boxes regardless how I
choose to interconnect them.
As (Internet) transit boxes would never be destination addresses
of the outermost header what problem do you see running anything
one likes on R1 or R2 or R3 and transporting it via open Internet
or perhaps some third party networks ?
So this is basically a tunnel over the open internet with all tunnel
endpoints in the same (or cooperating) administrative domain. In
that case it's indeed up to the participants to deal with and debug.
So the tunnel model I don't mind. Can we be certain it indeed fits
all deployments and leaking isn't possible. Theory and practice are
the same in theory, but not in practice :)
YEs, a tunnel is a quantum leap between layers, a wormhole between
Universes; a tunnel makes possible what otherwise can not be imagined:
get restricted web content from a country as if one were there.
The limited domain draft does set a perspective with respect to tunnels,
although one might wonder whether questions like whether two limited
domains connected by a tunnel make for a single limited domain (a
reducibility principle).
Alex
Cheers, Sander
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list i...@ietf.org Administrative
Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
