7 Aug
2013
7 Aug
'13
4:38 a.m.
I completely disagree. We should be moving forward, not backwards to 2
decade old band-aid internetworking technology, which means eventually all
routing should be based on BGP when traffic needs to travel beyond the
'local' 44-net resources. If IPIP or a VPN is needed to tunnel to a small
subnet, then it should tie to an upstream router that can handle the BGP
routing.
------------------------------
John D. Hays
K7VE
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223
<http://k7ve.org/blog> <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays>
<http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays>
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:27 AM, Marc, LX1DUC <lx1duc(a)rlx.lu> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
Yes, actually I know but I thought the routing loop at UCSD would be
temporary. OTOH those BGP-but-no-IPIP-guys are breaking the AMPRnet and
MUST fix their installation!