> Support > What about adding global load balancing to this using similar signal free > methods
That kinda works by default. By putting multiple RLOC-records in a Map-Reply where each is encoded as an RLE. But with flexible LCAF encoding, you could have a single RLOC-record made up of an RLE encoding like this: A B, B’ C M Where the ITR replicates to A, B, C, and the group address M. But for the second replication list entry (B, B’), it could be encoded as an AFI-list to avoid the multi-record case: Record-1: A B C M Record-2: A B’ C M Dino > > --szb > >> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Richard Li <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Support. >> >> Renwei >> >>> 在 Dec 5, 2015，6:14 AM，"Joel M. Halpern" <[email protected]> 写道： >>> >>> This is a call for adoption of draft-farinacci-lisp-signal-free-multicast. >>> Please speak up if you support or oppose adoption of this document. It has >>> been presented multiple times to the working group, generally to positive >>> reception as far as I can tell. >>> >>> This call will last two weeks, until CoB 21-December-2015. >>> >>> Yours, >>> Joel >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lisp mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lisp mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
