Hi, I'm sorry I didn't catch this earlier (attention elsewhere).
On 3/3/15 11:09 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for this document. It is really helpful to have a clear > introduction to LISP, and I appreciate the hard work that has gone into > producing this text. > > I have a small Discuss that is easily fixed. The essence is that you > should limit this document to a description of LISP and not try to use > it to bash other solutions. > > In Section 4.2 > > On the contrary BGP is a > push architecture, where the required network state is pushed by > means of BGP UPDATE messages to BGP speakers. > > You will be aware of RFC 5291 and the use of ORF to make BGP a pull-mode > protocol. > > (I won't say to you that LISP is push mode because a Map-Reply pushes > the mapping information from the map server to the client :-) > > So, my advice is to describe LISP in this document and to not make > comments about other systems. It isn't a beauty contest and it isn't > wise to try to say "my system is better/different from yours". > > The solution is to just remove this sentence. > > Similarly in 7.1 > > BGP is the standard protocol to implement inter-domain routing. With > BGP, routing information are propagated along the network and each > autonomous system can implement its own routing policy that will > influence the way routing information are propagated. The direct > consequence is that an autonomous system cannot precisely control the > way the traffic will enter the network. > > As opposed to BGP, a LISP site can strictly impose via which ETRs the > traffic must enter the the LISP site network even though the path > followed to reach the ETR is not under the control of the LISP site. > > Let's not get into the "BGP this, BGP that" debate. Just remove the > first paragraph and the first four words of the second paragraph. That > way you avoid all contention and write a document about LISP. I would go further. Whether LISP is a pull- or a push architecture (or something else) is entirely a characteristic of the mapping system used. The one in common use today is indeed a pull architecture. The text discussing push/pull, therefore, should be addressed to the mapping system. Eliot
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
