Re: [homenet] dst/src routing drafts (for IETF-91 rtgwg)

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Wed, 29 October 2014 06:50 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4164D1A1B17; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y-gINgaMGAv9; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13FE01A1A1C; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1337; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1414565419; x=1415775019; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=xwvEhg6DBrxvy6NV8EfiKONfdPSNwn6H7VcSbsbu/ZI=; b=OvRpdmfwqkWwOO2zRYjxXetz2xWMenIhPhf7JZv7sbUZAb/BARS6ohTL VTt1hA2fXVcdiPn2+74bTohNSu2Hn78eCQ0bPu+EKgqLSx4IUrAFhA3Mm FmEeGV6cXjhmB3xGkGGcBOtonFehdPLw+jJP6srltQleP/SdrW51YjCd5 c=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,808,1406592000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="91287274"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Oct 2014 06:50:17 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com [173.36.12.79]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s9T6oHHN031698 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 29 Oct 2014 06:50:17 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.248]) by xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com ([173.36.12.79]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 01:50:17 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
Thread-Topic: [homenet] dst/src routing drafts (for IETF-91 rtgwg)
Thread-Index: AQHP7KYr8Fy7zf5Z70yFtC9ToRE4KA==
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 06:50:17 +0000
Message-ID: <B6D9E5BD-8903-4133-8947-BB8AEAD97AA4@cisco.com>
References: <20141020204033.GD236844@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> <20141022190653.GB868521@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> <DFE4317C-E4B6-44AB-AED4-2FBBBD2888DA@cisco.com> <B445E8FD-13EE-4014-8D1C-7C9D4A188D2D@cisco.com> <544FF3F2.3050206@gmail.com> <20141029062837.GH5186@eidolon>
In-Reply-To: <20141029062837.GH5186@eidolon>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.120]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_71B80352-0042-4026-A97C-A58CF7EF403E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/8rSdI33fO8t8lIJsctbT6K9lGxE
Cc: Ole Troan <ot@cisco.com>, "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Subject: Re: [homenet] dst/src routing drafts (for IETF-91 rtgwg)
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 06:50:24 -0000

On Oct 28, 2014, at 11:28 PM, David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net> wrote:

> What I'm personally wondering most in this regard is: to what extent
> will larger networks deploy multiple prefixes to the hosts?

Well, define “larger”. Any network that gets a PI prefix is unlikely to deploy multiple prefixes. The question is at what size network is makes sense to obtain an AS number and a PI prefix, and use BGP to talk with one’s upstream. Wherever that boundary is, below that networks will use PA prefixes. The question then becomes: will they multi home?

And I think the answer today is that we don’t know the answer.