From: Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, July 29, 2013 6:35 AM
To: Michael Richardson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, David Lamparter 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [homenet] source routing requirements for routing protocols

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Michael Richardson 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
1) if we are going to introduce a new route to deal with the
   conflict, then the routing protocol must be able to express
   what might appear to be multiple routes to the same dest/prefix.

I believe the routes only need to be local and do not need to appear on the 
wire and in the routing protocol (in fact, they don't even need to be stored 
locally; the draft claims that they can be recalculated when adding / removing 
real routes from the FIB).

As regards the reason for existence of the routes themselves, David Lamparter 
tells me that he has in fact gotten the Linux IPv6 source routing code (the 
mythical CONFIG_IPV6_SUBTREES?) to work on 3.8. Attempting to CC a 
randomly-found email address I have for him so he can comment directly. David?

Agreed. We've had several presentations and tutorials on source/destination 
routing at the last three home net meetings. I believe they can be summarized 
by 1) All routers in the routing domain must use the same priority for routing 
lookup keys. In this case, the routing keys are Longest Prefix Match (LPM) on 
destination address and followed by LPM on source address limited to entries 
with the LPM destination address match. 2) All routers in the routing must use 
the same rules or policies to install additional routes to resolve ambiguities.

That the routers in the routing domain agree is actually more important than 
the actual routing key priority or policies.

Thanks,
Acee
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to