Subject: Re: [RRG] Try again

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 11:39:00 EDT

In einer eMail vom 28.05.2008 16:29:14 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  
[email-masked]:

The  reason I ask is that is seems to me that much of the discussion   
lately has appeared to me to be based upon widely varying base   
assumptions about what is and isn't necessary to "Do It Right".   I  
suspect it might be hard to reach consensus if this were to be  the  
case...

Thanks,
-drc

I feel the same way. So let me make some general remark as well as some  
general question:
 
In terms of routing (navigating) different "systems" may co-exist:  Seafarers 
watched the stars as well as the magnetic needle. I know that the  majority 
is in favor of address aggregation while I am in favor of topology  
aggregation, which are indeed two completely different approaches.
 
IMO both systems may co-exist, at least  for multiple years, as my  churn is 
neglectible. 
Like any new mechanism X, it would have to deal with the circumstance that  
not ALL deployed routers would
know X all of a sudden at the same point in time. Hence, tunneling is  
required, and yes: Propagation of capability X by means of BGP and OSPF  
advertisement.
 
So my question is this:
Would it be accepted that BGP advertised X, although the purpose of X  is to 
do forwarding without BGP routing tables ?
 
Heiner