Dino,
You have a very good point!
In order to help the reader understand the difference between LISP and BGP, it
might be a good idea to add a few pages that compare and contrast the two. It
should answer the following questions:
- In BGP, how does the producer of a route know that it is time to push it
- In LISP, how does the consumer of a route know that it is time to pull it
- In BGP, what happens when the control path between the producer and consumer
of a route becomes degraded or unusable
- In LISP, what happens when the control path between the producer and consumer
of a route becomes degraded or unusable
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 5:07 PM
> To: Ronald Bonica
> Cc: LISP mailing list list
> Subject: Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-04 (Part 3)
>
>
> > LISP is different from GRE and L3VPN because it pulls mapping information
> to itself. By contrast, GRE mapping information is generally configured
> statically. L3VPN mapping information is pushed by BGP. Therefore, LISP
> must deal with the problems of stale mapping information and cache misses.
> Also, LISP must deal with the problem of egress encapsulation node liveness.
>
> Ron, I have to keep you honest here. It doesn't matter if you pull or push,
> ANY information that is distributed can be stale.
>
> If a route changes in BGP and there is a congested path and the Update is
> continually being retransmitted by TCP to get to the BGP peer, that BGP peer
> has stale information.
>
> Dino
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
