Re: [lisp] Adopting draft-farinacci-lisp-signal-free-multicast?

> Support 
> What about adding global load balancing to this using similar signal free methods

That kinda works by default. By putting multiple RLOC-records in a Map-Reply where each is encoded as an RLE. 

But with flexible LCAF encoding, you could have a single RLOC-record made up of an RLE encoding like this:

A
B, B’
C
M

Where the ITR replicates to A, B, C, and the group address M. But for the second replication list entry (B, B’), it could be encoded as an AFI-list to avoid the multi-record case:

Record-1:
A
B
C
M

Record-2:
A
B’
C
M

Dino

> 
> --szb
> 
>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Richard Li <renwei.li@huawei.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Support.
>> 
>> Renwei
>> 
>>> 在 Dec 5, 2015，6:14 AM，"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> 写道：
>>> 
>>> This is a call for adoption  of draft-farinacci-lisp-signal-free-multicast.
>>> Please speak up if you support or oppose adoption of this document.  It has been presented multiple times to the working group, generally to positive reception as far as I can tell.
>>> 
>>> This call will last two weeks, until CoB 21-December-2015.
>>> 
>>> Yours,
>>> Joel
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lisp mailing list
>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> lisp mailing list
>> lisp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> lisp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp