Re: NHRP + LIS awareness

[Andrew Smith <[e-mail]>]

> From [e-mail] Wed Nov 15 18:19:07 1995
> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 18:00:43 PST
> From: [e-mail] (Bryan Gleeson)
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: NHRP + LIS awareness

Bryan,

> Also let's assume that host station S is aware of its own 
> LIS / subnet. It would thus seem possible to use NHRP for both
> intra-LIS and inter-LIS transfer without the host necessarily
> having a netmask of all 1s, and the consequent undesirable
> proliferation of host routes in the network. Routers would
> be able to do address aggregation, and NHRP could be used
> as a perfectly good intra-LIS address resolution protocol.
> Are there problems with any of this ?

Yes, NHRP always was a fine address resolution protocol. Of 
course you would have problems resolving IP/LANE hosts that way
but I guess the NHS could do a translation somehow, assuming
it had a co-located LES and BUS (although I've just remembered
this is the wrong list for that discussion, sorry).

The only proliferation of host routes that you get is the 
registrations from clients to NHS but those were there anyway.
Presumably the NHS was doing aggregation and advertising prefix
rather than per-host reachability into a routing protocol anyway.

Presumably this makes the NHS a superset of 1577 ATM-ARP Server 
functionality, no?

> 
> Regards,
> Bryan Gleeson
> Adaptec.
>

Andrew

********************************************************************************
Andrew Smith					TEL:	[phone]
Technology Synergy Unit				FAX:	[phone]
Bay Networks, Inc.				E-m:	[e-mail]
Santa Clara, CA
********************************************************************************