[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[RRG] re: How to avoid the side effect of cache in ITR



Sorry, I should fix a spelling mistake. 1.1.0.0/24 should be 1.1.0.0/16.  And the question “whether this overlapping phenomenon is ordinary or not” should be expressed more clearly as “whether this overlapping phenomenon is ordinary or not in an unchanged AS? Taking incremental deployment scenario into account, it’s impossible to split the aggregated route anymore if this phenomenon does exist there”.

 

 


发件人: Xu Xiaohu [mailto:xuxh@huawei.com]
发送时间: 2007年10月10 22:11
收件人: 'rrg@psg.com'
主题: How to avoid the side effect of cache in ITR

 

Hi all,

The cache in ITR reduce the forwarding or querying pressure on some mapping server, but it also results in the following side effects. Is there any other better solution to solve the above issues?

 

First, the mapping entry in cache is not real-time, it depends some ICMP message to reflect the connection status of the multi-homed site, which obviously brings some attack risks. The smaller TTL value of mapping entry will result in frequent mapping request.

 

Second, it can result in black-hole or sub-optimal forwarding path in some cases. For example, there are two prefixes in the mapping server, 1.1.1.0/24 and 1.1.0.0/24. At first, ITR receives a packet with destination of 1.1.2.1, and it will get a mapping response which includes 1.1.0.0/24->ETR mapping. Then a packet with destination of 1.1.1.1 arrives on ITR, it will result in black-hole or sub-optimal forwarding path. There are some approaches to avoid this: one is avoiding the EID prefixes in mapping database overlapped, the other is replying with all the specific EID-prefixes’ mapping covered by the matching EID-prefix. The former will result in non-aggregation, for example, some enterprise has a /16 prefix, from which one /24 prefix is assigned to one site, while the remaining /24 prefixes are assigned to another site called site B. With this approach, all the remaining /24 prefixes in site B should be stored in the mapping database separately. But in current Internet, prefix overlapping is permitted. I wonder whether this overlapping phenomenon is ordinary or not? The latter approach will result in some useless states in the ITR cache.

 

Is there any other better solution to solve the above issues?

 

Best regards,

 

Xu Xiaohu