IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [RAM] The mapping problem: rendezvous points?

Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com> Thu, 10 May 2007 03:59 UTC

Return-path: <ram-bounces@iab.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlzoX-0000hX-Ah; Wed, 09 May 2007 23:59:37 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlzoW-0000hS-5Q for ram@iab.org; Wed, 09 May 2007 23:59:36 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com ([171.68.10.87]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlzoU-0006Wu-Rj for ram@iab.org; Wed, 09 May 2007 23:59:36 -0400
Received: from sj-dkim-6.cisco.com ([171.68.10.81]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2007 20:59:34 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,515,1170662400"; d="scan'208"; a="420427880:sNHT43122424"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com (sj-core-3.cisco.com [171.68.223.137]) by sj-dkim-6.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l4A3xYSk003133; Wed, 9 May 2007 20:59:34 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l4A3xXA8014734; Thu, 10 May 2007 03:59:34 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.187]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 May 2007 20:59:33 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.3] ([10.21.155.71]) by xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 May 2007 20:59:33 -0700
In-Reply-To: <85F8BDA4-1EAA-4043-8CDB-112CEF29B2BC@virtualized.org>
References: <8F47F550-6224-4AFF-8359-CBA98D3F2FAB@muada.com> <271CF87FD652F34DBF877CB0CB5D16FC054EA470@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <9C228355-9425-4C66-A9A7-47498490E3B1@virtualized.org> <271CF87FD652F34DBF877CB0CB5D16FC054EA59D@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <86588E66-ACED-4DD2-B286-3DA5B2518B1A@virtualized.org> <4641750A.9010906@cisco.com> <283D52E5-AD3A-40FA-B81C-27DD950176CA@virtualized.org> <3DF89B6B-0CC4-4C60-9519-80CF5FECCE9B@nokia.com> <F2F9AE97-7599-42BB-A542-A4B33AC3FD18@virtualized.org> <F3A8A33D-614D-4E6F-9741-61FFBB42E40C@nokia.com> <85F8BDA4-1EAA-4043-8CDB-112CEF29B2BC@virtualized.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <FD31231D-A190-41CB-AC4F-FB7871D7E695@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [RAM] The mapping problem: rendezvous points?
Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 20:59:31 -0700
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2007 03:59:33.0467 (UTC) FILETIME=[9E3AC2B0:01C792B7]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=816; t=1178769574; x=1179633574; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim6002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dino@cisco.com; z=From:=20Dino=20Farinacci=20<dino@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[RAM]=20The=20mapping=20problem=3A=20rendezvous=20poi nts? |Sender:=20; bh=1PNDR9k/chGzCJBqOn2rZGGaPeg1Or72QPOCBD+rZ9A=; b=cTF7jbxOVAs5qnEV3Sghcpd3/9biE2v/Kw5GP8qFD8WASbFXT0ZYZAsrVs4/n2NuM5n340yq URf3x/Iu4/rt0N7kwcEoUO3a50qmC7BFJWM1QFCAyjJEHOdewV0EB6th;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-6; header.From=dino@cisco.com; dkim=pass (si g from cisco.com/sjdkim6002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: ram@iab.org
X-BeenThere: ram@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing and Addressing Mailing List <ram.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram>, <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ram>
List-Post: <mailto:ram@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram>, <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ram-bounces@iab.org

>>> I'll ask again:  how does this ARP thing work again?
>> First off, all the ARP implementations I know of queue the packet  
>> during the loopkup, i.e., no loss.
>
> That's what I thought, but folks have been saying that routers  
> don't queue anymore.

First, not all implementations.

Second what good is queuing the packet when you have two TCP  
connections starting out where the SYNs of each are going to the same  
default router you don't have an ARP entry for? That is, you lose the  
first packet from that connection's point of view.

There is so much chit-chat on a host before real work starts up that  
the ARP entry is already cached. And many implementations, when a  
interface comes up, sends a gratuitous ARP to announce itself and  
search for a duplicate address.

Dino

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email