IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Questions about draft-saucez-lisp-itr-graceful-03

Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@inria.fr> Wed, 19 February 2014 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <damien.saucez@inria.fr>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B511A04F4 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:31:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
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 NlY0TITyzI-s for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04AFC1A00B2 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:31:34 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,506,1389740400"; d="scan'208";a="49694167"
Received: from faucon.inria.fr ([138.96.201.73]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 19 Feb 2014 18:31:31 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <B5B0430A-9CD8-40A1-AC20-5D98B1EACC0F@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:31:31 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2D848EE0-F117-4FF7-9DB3-C5DA742A8804@inria.fr>
References: <20140218144825842648.087ffc67@sniff.de> <5689A37C-B58A-4144-AB01-A61DFCE1B999@gmail.com> <A5E2D567-7C8D-4024-AE61-CFDA9400123A@inria.fr> <A948F13B-023B-43FB-92EC-D4DA6A832404@gmail.com> <D232D17D-49D4-484C-96AB-5C5D48291AF9@inria.fr> <561A89E6-B2AB-4EF3-8FFC-B87BEBF680E2@gmail.com> <B5B0430A-9CD8-40A1-AC20-5D98B1EACC0F@cisco.com>
To: Darrel Lewis <darlewis@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/GWaB6AOtR5vOpgs-S0epPlj5El4
Cc: "cf(mailer list)" <cf@cisco.com>, Luigi Iannone <luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr>, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Questions about draft-saucez-lisp-itr-graceful-03
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 17:31:36 -0000

On 19 Feb 2014, at 18:29, Darrel Lewis (darlewis) <darlewis@cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> On Feb 19, 2014, at 9:18 AM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> 1.  if you store the cache for next reboot, you will not experience
>>> the miss storm when the traffic will come back to you.
>>> 
>>> 2.  if you shutdown an ITR, packets are forwarded to another ITR and
>>> there is a miss storm as long as the prefixes in the backup ITR do not
>>> cover those that where in the "down" ITR.
>> 
>> LISP promotes multi-homing for inbound traffic to a LISP site, as well as outbound packets from a LISP site. You deploy LISP so you can get active-active multihoming.
>> 
>> So this storm will typically be academic.
> 
> +1 
> 
> I've always thought that the mapping system will have to have capacity to deal with broken clients, random LIG bots, and DoS attacks (just like, say, DNS does).  This leads me to believe that over-engineering the management of sending map-requests on a given ITR will likely end up creating more complexity, and therefor fragility, in the implementation.
> 

That's a point we can discuss, but are you ready to accept packet loss?
At the end, a miss = a packet drop...

Damien Saucez

> 
> -Darrel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email