[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lisp] LISP Interworking: Proxy Egress Tunnel Routers



 
> 
> I am not saying there isn't a viable business model for PETRs.  I am
> just saying that I don't know what the business model is for PETRs
> and that I think that at least one seemingly viable model should be
> proposed before the whole PETR concept is accepted.
> 
> 
> 

Here is a simple one.  A provider wants to advertise that it allows for
IPv6 connectivity, but it does not have equipment in the access network
that supports v6 natively.  So it offers a v6 service that includes a
CPE device that runs LISP, and some PETRs for those CPE's to use when
accessing non-LISP sites.  IPv6 packets sent from the hosts at the site
are encapsulated in v4 and sent over the access network that does not
support v6.

There are a myriad of other possibilities here, including over-the-top
service providers who offer PETR services.  

-Darrel

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.