[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Re: LISP-CONS Default Mapper = Re-Encapsulating Tunnel Router
The ITRs wouldn't need to use the CAR-CDR network directly if they
had a mapping. The CONS spec says an ITR only sends a Map-Request
when it gets a cache miss. But if the ITR had 0.0.0.0/0 in it's
mapping database, it would never have a cache miss.
Yes, but my suggestion is that if you have the full mapping database
in a local full-database RETR, then it would make sense to use that
(or a nearby server which also gets the full feed of updates too) as
a local, fast, ~100% contactable, query server. This means you
don't need the CDR-CAR system.
Right, you could use NERD to push the mappings to RETRs.
We all want to withdraw routes . . .
Not me - and maybe not Eliot. I would be happy for any of the
ITR-ETR proposals to work with the same or a moderately higher
number of BGP advertised prefixes, as long as, in general, each such
Well, don't forget what one of the goals are, to reduce the size of
the core routing tables.
. . . so the only way to get packets to a LISP site from a
non-LISP site is to have the packets hit an ITR some where on the
path to the LISP site. That could be a proxy ITR that does this.
As far as I can see, the only way a "proxy ITR" could receive
packets from non-upgraded networks is for the prefix these addresses
are part of to be advertised in BGP. Without a BGP advertisement
for the prefix in which LISP maps address space, the packets will
never leave the border routers of the non-upgraded networks.
Right. Either we make them a very small number of prefixes (I say <
100) or we don't do it. And the only alternative is then to do a NAT
in the ITR.
Or the LISP site can be smart enough to use an EID that *is
in* the routing system. Such as a PA address that will always
continue to be there.
We are working out the details on how to get a LISP site to talk
to a non-LISP site.
There is no problem with a sending host in a network with LISP ITRs
sending packets to hosts with non-LISP mapped addresses, including
those in sites with no LISP ITRs and/or ETRs. The problem I am
discussing is how to get a packet from a sending host in a network
with no LISP ITRs to an ITR so it can be tunneled to the right ETR
of a destination host with a LISP-mapped address.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg