IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] #5: LISP protocol version is alive and kicking

"Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com> Mon, 21 September 2009 22:42 UTC

Return-Path: <darlewis@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E144728C0F4 for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.57
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.57 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.029, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 nSwu53SgV64e for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:42:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86A7828C12D for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:42:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANqdt0qrR7O6/2dsb2JhbAC7K4hQAY5zBYQbiwI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,426,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="43751374"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Sep 2009 22:43:27 +0000
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n8LMhRSY001543; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:43:27 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n8LMhR9k001645; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:43:27 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-213.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.153]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:43:27 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 15:43:28 -0700
Message-ID: <C0ACCB7B60E6F14B9AC46D742C1009A15D0C22@xmb-sjc-213.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090921224058.4C2CA6BE62F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [lisp] #5: LISP protocol version is alive and kicking
Thread-Index: Aco7DJeO34t+gKiURL+8c6jkmGtzwAAACdgQ
References: <20090921224058.4C2CA6BE62F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
From: "Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com>
To: Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, lisp@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2009 22:43:27.0581 (UTC) FILETIME=[EF69B8D0:01CA3B0C]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=575; t=1253573007; x=1254437007; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=darlewis@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Darrel=20Lewis=20(darlewis)=22=20<darlewis@cisc o.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[lisp]=20#5=3A=20LISP=20protocol=20vers ion=20is=20alive=20and=20kicking |Sender:=20; bh=qjvq8nlLJEBPYD1B1W0EqJCidQpjbnfbIuuadlK8pt8=; b=CStUQyIbELwpxGqxpjcuqKNyzvfmKPr4KQHEDBwf3fpOHRAxUl7RXuKa2L fwPGlzipKbzHef/reKafYnKqdfFVRYqGreaImdUj7MmtjRU4MxwxWzYusDYJ vwqJY9bp1E;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=darlewis@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
Subject: Re: [lisp] #5: LISP protocol version is alive and kicking
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:42:27 -0000

 
> 
> If b2 never got a mapping for A (because it got neither 
> user-traffic which it
> could glean a mapping for A from, nor a Map-Request with piggybacked
> information for A), how is it going to get a mapping for A 
> unless either i)
> it talks to its fellow ETR b1, or ii) it goes through a 
> mapping-resolution
> cycle on A?
> 

Right it goes through a mapping resolution cycle.  This is a feature.
The ETR can then use clock sweep if the "header version" changes and it
wants to have ITRs re-learn and see the new information.

-Darrel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email