On 2/2/15 4:16 PM, "Russ White" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
In step 3 of DF election, the list of IP addresses is ordered in "increasing numeric value." What if you have a mix of v4 and v6 addresses? [Satya] One possible solution may be to do a lexicographic comparison of keys (the iP address strings in this case considered as sequence of bytes). For unequal-length keys like in the case of v4 and v6, assume that a unique 'padding' alphabet is present after the v4 address that always has priority over other alphabets (byte values). This will make the comparison non-ambiguous, and still the same algorithm suffices. Would you want a different DF for v4 and v6 devices? Maybe no -- because this is layer 2 forwarding, but maybe yes. If the answer is no, then this should be documented, I think, even if it's in a different doc. [Satya] I believe a different DF for v4 and v6 is unnecessary (this is layer 2 forwarding as you pointed out, and I wrote the above keeping that in mind). The above method should work and can be documented (to remove unambiguity). FYI, it may help to know there are other DF election procedures that are being worked on that are provably more robust, and do not have the problem discussed here. :-) Russ
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
