IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [RAM] LISP NERD/CONS, eFIT-APT & Ivip compared

Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au> Sat, 21 July 2007 11:49 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 1ICDT1-0005GQ-CY; Sat, 21 Jul 2007 07:49:47 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ICDSz-0005GG-Jm for ram@iab.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2007 07:49:45 -0400
Received: from gair.firstpr.com.au ([150.101.162.123]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ICDSv-0006dc-JX for ram@iab.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2007 07:49:45 -0400
Received: from [10.0.0.8] (zita.firstpr.com.au [10.0.0.8]) by gair.firstpr.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6EF59DEB; Sat, 21 Jul 2007 21:49:36 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <46A1F2C4.9040605@firstpr.com.au>
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 21:49:24 +1000
From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
Organization: First Principles
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (Windows/20070716)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ram@iab.org
Subject: Re: [RAM] LISP NERD/CONS, eFIT-APT & Ivip compared
References: <469C962B.1090600@firstpr.com.au> <12D6E107-9D58-487A-BC5C-6BAC9495EC96@cisco.com> <46A084FE.9000003@firstpr.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <46A084FE.9000003@firstpr.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a
Cc: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
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

Further to my response to Dino's message about my comparison, I
have updated the page:

  http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/comp/

to reflect some corrections which are easily visible.

Most importantly, I correct my mistake of not recognising that
that LISP-CONS does not contain any Priority or Weight information
in its mapping - which means that the LISP-CONS ITR has a simple
job, with no decisions or involvement in determining reachability.

There is a section:

  http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/comp/#LC-suggestions

where I point out parts of the current LISP-CONS-01 draft which I
think should be altered, because I think they are contradictory or
confusing.


Although I don't compare IPvLX, there is a section there:

  http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/comp/#IPvLX

which links to http://ipvlx.com and to Fred's recent messages
which helped me understand this proposal better.

  - Robin


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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email