Browse Prior Art Database

New Scheme for Internet Routing and Addressing (ENCAPS) for IPNG (RFC1955)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000004181D
Original Publication Date: 1996-Jun-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 4 page(s) / 9K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

R. Hinden: AUTHOR

Abstract

This document was submitted to the IETF IPng area in response to RFC 1550. Publication of this document does not imply acceptance by the IPng area of any ideas expressed within. Comments should be submitted to the big-internet@munnari.oz.au mailing list.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 29% of the total text.

Network Working Group R. Hinden

Request for Comments: 1955 Ipsilon Networks, Inc.

Category: Informational June 1996

New Scheme for Internet Routing and Addressing (ENCAPS) for IPNG

Status of This Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo

does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of

this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

This document was submitted to the IETF IPng area in response to RFC

1550. Publication of this document does not imply acceptance by the

IPng area of any ideas expressed within. Comments should be

submitted to the big-internet@munnari.oz.au mailing list.

This memo describes a proposal made to to the Routing and Addressing

group [ROAD] January 1992 by Robert Hinden. It was originally sent

as an email message. It proposes a medium term solution to the

Internet's routing and addressing problems.

INTRODUCTION

I would like to propose a new scheme which I believe is a good medium

term solution to the routing and address problems of the internet.

It has the following positive attributes:

- No Changes to Hosts

- No Changes to Most Routers

- No New Routing Protocols

- No New Internet Protocols

- No Translation of Addresses in Packets

- Reduces the Routing Table Size in All Routers

- Uses the Current Internet Address Structure

It is not a solution good for all time, because it does impose some

size limits and does not support new internet services such as

guaranteed bandwidth, delay, etc. It does require border routers to

do additional processing, but does not require any packet

translation. I believe that this scheme will give us enough time to

put into place a long term solution (i.e. pick one or more of CLNP,

*NAT, IDPR, IDRP, Nimrod, Unified, NewIP, etc.)

This scheme is based on the ideas presented by Deborah Estrin (route

on ADs), Martha Steenstrup (encapsulation), and probably steals from

ideas put forward by Noel Chiappa, Van Jacobson , Ross Callon, Dave

Oran, and everyone else in the ROAD group.

CONTEXT

I think that we (the ROAD group) agree that in the short term we need

to make better use of the IP address space. I think we also (mostly)

agree that in the long term we need a solution that can deal with a

very large number of end points and routes, as well as support new

services such as guarantees of service, source selected routes, etc.

We do not agree on any of the details of this but do agree that we

can not figure out a ...