Dear Mohamed and Christian, I have read your draft about a compact header for LISP to avoid MTU issues. However, have you also considered bandwidth savings for small packets as an additional benefit? I mean, when you use LISP to send small packets between two locations, the overhead is huge: a) For example, if you are sending an IPv4 TCP ACK (40 bytes), with standard LISP over IPv6 you need 96 bytes: OH (IPv6): 40 bytes UDP: 8 bytes LISP: 8 bytes IH (IPv4): 20 bytes TCP: 20 bytes However, if you use the compact header proposed in your draft, you will only need 72 bytes (if I am right), so you are saving 25% of the bandwidth. Taking into account that there is a high amount of TCP ACKs, this may perhaps have an impact. b) Or if you are sending an RTP sample with e.g. 20 bytes of payload, using standard LISP over IPv6, you need 116 bytes: OH (IPv6): 40 bytes UDP: 8 bytes LISP: 8 bytes IH (IPv4): 20 bytes UDP: 8 bytes RTP: 12 bytes Payload: 20 bytes But if you use the compact header, you will only need 88 bytes (24% saving). In order to increase these savings, we are currently considering the possibility of submitting a draft adding header compression with ROHC, and multiplexing a number of small packets into a single LISP one, if the ITR has a number of small packets in its buffer. Reducing the number of packets will reduce the processing in intermediate routers, also reducing e.g. energy consumption and perhaps some processing delays. BR, Jose
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
