Re: [BEHAVE] [Behave] Re: Some comments about draft-chen-behave-rsnat-00

[Chen Gang <[e-mail]>]

Hello Med,

My reply is inline.

Thanks.
2009/7/22 <[e-mail]>

>  Dear Gang, all,
>
> Please see inline.
>
> Cheers,
> Med
>
>
> => The terms "reliable" and "scalable" is a sort of qualitative definition
> other than quantitative indicators. Therefore, it's hard to find some
> paremeters to evaluate. The evaluation could be made compared to the
> situation without this mechanisms.
>
 [Med]  I think that providing a set of parameters to qualify scalability is
> useful.
>

=> It could be better. Could you propose some text on that?


>       [original text]5.1.  Address mapping Attribute
>
     Address mapping attribute is an optional transitive attribute that is
>    composed of a set of TLVs.  The type code of the attribute is to be
>    assigned by IANA.  Each TLV contains information corresponding to a
>    particular tunnel technology.  The TLV is structured as follows:
>
>    [comments]A new BGP capability attribute should also be defined to avoid
> session failure  when not supported by both BGP speakers.
>
>    => What does the "new BGP capability attribute" mean? Is new path
> attribute not enough to carry mapping information?
>

> [Med] the capability attribute is required to prevent session failure when
> one of the BGP speakers do not support the @ mapping attribute.
>

=> I guess adding a new capability attributes is an alternative solution to
switch mapping information. However, corresponding to the new capablity
attribute, we might need to define respective message and extend the error
handling. Compared to that, extending path attribute might more easily be
deployed.  Actually, the redundancy mechanisms only need best-effort
performance.

Thanks for your constructive comments.

Gang



>
>