Re: [Softwires] [BEHAVE] Some Thought abouttheAutomaticTunnelAddress

["Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin at boeing.com>]

Hi Remi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: behave-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Després
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:03 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: softwires at ietf.org; eric.burgey at orange-ftgroup.com; behave at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [Softwires] Some Thought abouttheAutomaticTunnelAddress
> 
> 
> Le 24 sept. 09 à 18:23, Templin, Fred L a écrit :
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: behave-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces at ietf.org] On
> >> Behalf Of Rémi Després
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 6:55 AM
> >> To: Brian E Carpenter
> >> Cc: softwires at ietf.org; eric.burgey at orange-ftgroup.com;
> >> behave at ietf.org; Templin, Fred L
> >> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [Softwires] Some Thought aboutthe
> >> AutomaticTunnelAddress
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 18 sept. 09 à 22:59, Brian E Carpenter a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Hi Eric,
> >>>
> >>> On 2009-09-19 02:33, eric.burgey at orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>>> Automatic tunnelling must be limited to a "Site".
> >>>
> >>> If you are referring to ISATAP, that may be a sustainable position.
> >>> However, by definition, 6to4 and Teredo involve multiple sites,
> >>> for any reasonable definition of site.
> >>
> >> ... and we can add 6rd (an ISP IP4 network across which IPv6 is
> >> tunneled in 6rd isn't in general considered a "site").
> >
> > That depends on one's definition of "site".
> 
> Agreed.
> Only if there would be an agreed definition of site would it be
> possible to be sure what Eric's sentence means, and to then formally
> agree or disagree with it.
> 
> > I would consider
> > the ISP network as a site that contains other sites (i.e.,
> > recursively-nested sites-within-sites).
> 
> In my understanding, the original meaning of site (now deprecated but
> still present in many minds) was close to "customer site", and in any
> case not recursive.
> 
> "Domain" seems to me more intuitive than "site" for recursive or
> hierarchical entities (routing domains, administrative domains etc.)

Actually, in my opinion better than either "domain" or
"site" is "enterprise", which RANGER and VET talk about.
This is also almost the same as what the original CATENET
work called "Packet Switching Network (PSN)".

Fred
fred.l.templin at boeing.com
  
> 
> Regards,
> RD
> 
> >
> 
> > In
> 
> > Fred
> > fred.l.templin at boeing.com
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> RD
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Behave mailing list
> >> Behave at ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave