marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:
LLU message exchange is reliable i.e. there should be an ack back, right?so a node should not update the preferences of a locator set of which the LLU message has not be acked imho
Sure, that is one possible way to resolve the synchronization issue. (Putting them in the same Update message might perform a bit better though.)But my point was really that we *have* a synchronization issue, even if we do not use some form of indicies as a compressed representation for the locators or locator pairs.
Erik