Re: [Anima] GRASP ALL_GRASP_NEIGHBORS

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 28 April 2020 13:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771DC3A14D4 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 06:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wQynGHwmDlJ1 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 06:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ACFE3A096C for <anima@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 06:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2E538983; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 09:12:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFD498A; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 09:14:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
cc: anima@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <2b2e8b52-fa4e-e3b1-35bb-d3d350678079@joelhalpern.com>
References: <30733.1588000580@localhost> <5900.1588002250@localhost> <d99d1741-e6c0-3653-2815-4918edcd1e33@gmail.com> <2714.1588025685@localhost> <cd3bc2ff-00d2-242d-1b90-27c5c71fd317@joelhalpern.com> <348.1588042461@localhost> <2b2e8b52-fa4e-e3b1-35bb-d3d350678079@joelhalpern.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 09:14:33 -0400
Message-ID: <11721.1588079673@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/5s5ywqIyJW1QLmgP8bXnmqBjt7M>
Subject: Re: [Anima] GRASP ALL_GRASP_NEIGHBORS
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 13:14:42 -0000

Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
    > LAGs can balance IPSec because the SPI is cafefully placed in the same
    > location as the UDP / TCP port numbers, so if the LAG recognizes the protocol
    > type (which most do), it can use the SPI just teh way it uses the port
    > numbers.

Yes, I thought as much, but since only a single SA would be negotiated, as
long as the SPI# remains the same, then it would hash the same.

    > Yes, it is a hack.  It is an OLD hack.

:-)
Those are the best.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-