
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 00:49 +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> >> > Assume a network using public IPs: I don't think that a random ISP
> >> > customer (as seen from the ISP) has success in getting the ISP to speak
> >> > BGPv4 with him.
> 
> > The problem is: Even if I want to make a gateway for FunkFeuer at my
> > home, I plain simply can't.
> 
> Yes.  What you're saying is that there isn't a way to multihome an IP
> network unless you have an upstream that (1) allows you to advertise random
> BGP routes and (2) doesn't do uRPF.

Probably - I have no practical experience with BGPv4.

> This issue is not specific to mesh networks -- in my opinion, it's the one

Of course not. But (pure) cable networks tend to be geographically
rather local. Let alone the IP network-oriented configuration ....
And IPv6 won't change anything.

> most unsatisfying thing about IP.

On the one hand, may be yes, maybe no, but it's now here and won't
change IMHO in the foreseeable future. So it shouldn't be ignored.

On the other hand, the Internet protocol is a quite technical thing. But
if one deploys it at some point, there are other issues also important.
One may like it or not but building and running $SERVICE implies (in
somewhat sane environments) that the entity building and running
$SERVICE has also something to say there. And if the entity decides to
limit access for whatever reason, it's a fact. So that won't change
either in the near future IMHO.

Of course one can ignore the above situation and simple do not support
such environments but then one should mention that explicitly (and not
claim the reverse or even put it in the list of goals).

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services




