Re: Comments on NHRP spec.,, modes of deployment etc.

[[e-mail]]

Grenville, Bruce:

> 
> Bruce,
> 
> 	[..I think shur@arch4 wrote..]
> >>> I would like the spec to define and differentiate between the NHRP
> >>> client-server interface
> >>
> >>I see no difference from a protocol point of view.  Any station within
> >>the NBMA can potentially send both request and response packets.
> >>
> >>> and the NHRP server-server interface, and keep
> >>> these separate from any discussion of modes of deployment.
> >>
> >>There is no server to server protocol.
> 
> I understood the original question to request a clarification
> of the fact that there can be two identifiable 'interfaces' involved
> in NHRP (the host-NHS and the NHS-NHS), even though the same
> packet format is used to propagate NHRP messages in each case.
> So, in one sense there is indeed a server to server 'protocol',
> it just happens to be the same as the client-server case.
> 
> The alternative interpretation is that every NHS is considered
> a client of the NHS it forwards the query to, so ensuring
> you only ever have a client-NHS case. Is this they way you
> visualise it? (forgive me it says this in the spec - my memory
> is not what it might be sometimes :)
> 
> The advantage of the former approach is that you'd then have
> a conceptual framework for evolving the client-NHS and
> NHS-NHS protocols in different ways if it seemed reasonable
> in the future (e.g. to hide loop avoidance or black-hole detection
> mechanisms from the clients?).

I agree. It would be nice if the NHRP client was a relatively simple beast.
If servers needed to get complicated to deal with loop avoidance etc., it
would also be nice not to burden the client.
> 
> cheers,
> gja
>