IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] [Ila] LISP for ILA - scaling

"jmh.direct" <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com> Sat, 17 March 2018 01:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563D9126C19; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
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 HehPvpXjUpws; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17C21126C3D; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E66591C01F9; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1521250864; bh=fwQ8uqVKhwax3oniKwA1E0RrFlI8F5NNRKfBBlxu8Ag=; h=Date:Subject:In-Reply-To:From:To:Cc:From; b=dIWT3tVkTFvQWt88zCklfDESBaK5mqbvd11FrBm22AnhHQgGgU0WlOhkiU1M0M5Fi OJgtN3ik1FqUoPo4M5s3xP7K9W3DMljFlQRrVH28sHthX5oSSI+/JOZP+tvbMLjDjm soIQJZyAcZSRCGF8zqUvaXL3Bjkrr6QPuEI59H7M=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from [IPv6:2600:380:1975:73c3:a0ed:3c16:f445:1888] (unknown [IPv6:2600:380:1975:73c3:a0ed:3c16:f445:1888]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D058B1C0107; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
SavedFromEmail: jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 21:41:01 -0400
In-Reply-To: <03B18A68-D80B-4B7D-A2A4-5D539FF1AEEC@gmail.com>
Importance: normal
From: "jmh.direct" <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@quantonium.net>, David Meyer <dmm@1-4-5.net>, "Alberto Rodriguez Natal (natal)" <natal@cisco.com>, Florin Coras <fcoras.lists@gmail.com>, "ila@ietf.org" <ila@ietf.org>, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>, Eliot Lear <elear@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--_com.samsung.android.email_5589217831160700"
Message-Id: <20180317014105.17C21126C3D@ietfa.amsl.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/Rkw0bH_wyBBHQ7Da0R4ZY8WZvac>
Subject: Re: [lisp] [Ila] LISP for ILA - scaling
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:41:07 -0000

His analysis of the control push size did not go to 1 billion.  That is why I stated that for any constrained environment push would work.  I do not know of a use case for 1 billion entities in those constraints.Internet-scale is a different problem.
Yours,Joel


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 6, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Date: 3/16/18  20:44  (GMT-05:00) To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@quantonium.net>, David Meyer <dmm@1-4-5.net>, "Alberto Rodriguez Natal (natal)" <natal@cisco.com>, Florin Coras <fcoras.lists@gmail.com>, ila@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, Eliot Lear <elear@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [Ila] [lisp] LISP for ILA - scaling 
Copying Eliot.

I don’t remember Eliot analyzing the data-plane. But he did see how far the mapping database could scale with push and don’t recall he saying 1 billion would be achievable either.

Dino

> On Mar 16, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> 
> From the analysis Eliot did many years ago for a LISP push solution, for any constrained solution (a data center, a mobile operator, a fixed service operator) the number of entries is probably not a problem.  Even for a conventional router.  Churn rate, in its various manifestations, could well be an issue.
> 
> Sharding is but one of several ways to divide and conquer to avoid those issues.  Separating control load from data plane load is also a useful way to help keep things manageable.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 3/16/18 3:33 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes, understand. But even in your constrained “domain”, there may be just too much state to push to all nodes. Especially in the 5G use-case. It wasn’t a problem in the LISP beta network because the proxy xTRs had relatively coarse prefixes that reached lots of EIDs.
>>> 
>> The state would need to be sharded. You'd probably need to do this
>> anyway for mapping-servers or high thoughput Internet facing routers
>> for which using a cache would be challenging.
>> Tom
>>>> require provisioning ILA-Rs to handle the full load if necessary to be
>>>> robust.
>>> 
>>> Yes indeed.
>>> 
>>> Dino
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> ila mailing list
>> ila@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ila

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email