[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Flow label - the problem
On 21-apr-2005, at 16:25, marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:
We have a host A with 4 addresses: IPa1, IPa2, IPa3 and IPa4 and
host b with 2 addresses (to keep it simple) IPb1 and IPb2
Now a communication between these two hosts. The shim context
between host a and host b has IPa1 and IPb1 as ulid and, because
whatever reason (policy, efficiency) host a decide only to include
on alternative locator in the context, say, IPa2 and host b does
not include any additional locators. At this point, the context 1
between host a and host b has: ulids: IPa1 and IPb1, locator set
for a: IPa1 and IPa2, locator set for b IPb1.
I see the problem. Howerver, this should be easy to fix even if we
don't want to mandate exchanging the full locator set (which doesn't
seem unreasonable to me). In BGP and other routing protocols systems
usually have a router id so another system can detect that it's
talking to the same remote system over different links. We can do the
same thing here. This value doesn't have to have any meaning to the
remote system, the only requirement is that it's unique. A good
choice for this would be one of the IP addresses of a host or maybe
the interface identifier if that contains enough uniqueness.