Is that a SHOULD or a MUST? From the text quoted below, I assume that it is a
SHOULD.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 5:47 PM
> To: Ronald Bonica
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [lisp] gleaned mappings
>
> The spec says that gleanings are verified by sending a Map-Request to
> the mapping database system.
>
> Dino
>
> On Jul 22, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > In Section 4.1 of the draft-ietf-lisp you say:
> >
> > In order to defer the need for a mapping lookup in the reverse
> > direction, an ETR MAY create a cache entry that maps the source EID
> > (inner header source IP address) to the source RLOC (outer header
> > source IP address) in a received LISP packet. Such a cache entry
> is
> > termed a "gleaned" mapping and only contains a single RLOC for the
> > EID in question. More complete information about additional RLOCs
> > SHOULD be verified by sending a LISP Map-Request for that EID.
> Both
> > ITR and the ETR may also influence the decision the other makes in
> > selecting an RLOC. See Section 6 for more details.
> >
> > Has anyone thought through the security implications and possible
> unexpected side effects of these "gleaned" mappings?
> >
> > Ron
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
