Re: [RRG] anycast/default as a transition tool [On the Transitionability of LISP]

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Eliot,

I haven't been keeping up with this discussion, but will return to
it in the next few days.

You wrote:

> Pekka Savola wrote:
>> Both anycast and default route also have similar failure modes, i.e.,
>> if a default/anycast route is advertised by a router which doesn't
>> have full topology information (or at least a lead where to forward
>> the packets to get it), connectivity of Internet is going to be
>> balkanized depending on which anycast/default you happen to be using.
>>
>> Maybe we don't need a solution at the edges, just more default routing
>>
> 
> Ultimately in the case of LISP all that is being offered is a mapping. 
> And so any ITR that advertises a default or supernet for
> non-participants merely needs to have the entire mapping and offer to
> map for those mappings.

LISP-CONS would not work very well because it will typically take a
few seconds (I guess - one, two or three) to get mapping from across
the global ITR-CAR-CDR*n-CAR network.  LISP-NERD ITRs have copies of
the full database, so they should be able to forward all packets
instantly.

  - Robin


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com 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