IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [BEHAVE] draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00

Dean Cheng <Chengd@huawei.com> Fri, 13 November 2009 02:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Chengd@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB04428C15F for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:25:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UgmLTpg8ZMiT for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:25:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usaga03-in.huawei.com (usaga03-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.220]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D3028C15A for <behave@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:25:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (usaga03-in [172.18.4.17]) by usaga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0KT100K0102VX1@usaga03-in.huawei.com> for behave@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:25:43 -0600 (CST)
Received: from DeanChengSC (host-19-8.meeting.ietf.org [133.93.19.8]) by usaga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0KT100L1B02R2Q@usaga03-in.huawei.com> for behave@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:25:43 -0600 (CST)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:25:45 -0800
From: Dean Cheng <Chengd@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <4AFCBC87.20009@gmail.com>
To: 'Brian E Carpenter' <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, behave@ietf.org
Message-id: <C1463B96FBAB4A59B7B279C43BDCE778@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: AcpkBJjRuj2Ne5wxQO2gZYG/y1eqawAAwHhQ
References: <4AFCBC87.20009@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:25:15 -0000

Brian,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of
> Brian E Carpenter
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:55 PM
> To: behave@ietf.org
> Subject: [BEHAVE] draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
> 
> My question about this draft is whether there is available code
> and implementation experience with SCSP, which was defined in 1998.

I don't know personally whether there is any available code, but
RFC2335 and RFC2443 documented two separate applications using SCSP,
although also about 10 years ago.

However, SCSP (as mentioned in my presentation) itself heavily 
"borrowed" link-state based algorithm and mechanisms from OSPF/ISIS
(also defined in 90's or earlier) that have been widely deployed since.

> 
> If there isn't code and experience, since it is a quite complex
> design, I would be a bit worried.
> 
> On the other hand, I believe that something of the complexity
> of SCSP is absolutely required to provide reliable synchronisation.
> There is no simple, lightweight way to do this reliably.

Totally agreed.

Dean

> 
>     Brian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email