Hi,
I have the following comments/questions on the draft:
- Why allow IPsec tunnel mode? Is there a case where it provides some value?
- Do you want to recommend omitting the GRE checksum?
- I think the draft should discuss what happens when the best route
moves from one spoke to another spoke. Both the cases where the
host/prefix is still reachable via the original spoke and when it isn't
should be covered. As should avoiding blackholes, and any periods of
suboptimal forwarding.
- I think the draft is missing a description of how/when NHRP Purges are
used, e.g., resulting from interactions with routing. (Yes there is an
overlap with the above, but it depends a bit on your solution.)
- I the draft should discuss the NHRP scaling considerations that are
important in implementation and deployment/operation. (Basically the
solution is proposing network wide ARP.) You already have a teaser on
this when you mention rate limiting.
- NIT/editorial: If section 4 is your "Solution Overview", where is the
solution specification? More seriously, I found parts of this section
more of a narrative of an example than a protocol specification.
- NIT: Assuming the Indirection Notification described in section 4.3 is
the same as the NHRP Traffic Indication covered in 5.1, can you align
the names and fix the reference in 4.3?
Thanks,
Lou
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
