>> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: Anton Smirnov [mailto:[email protected]] >> Enviado el: viernes, 01 de julio de 2016 14:34 >> Para: Jose Saldana <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> CC: 'José Ruiz Mas' <[email protected]> >> Asunto: Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP >> >> Hi Jose, >> marking packet as compressed is one thing - necessary but not sufficient. >> Backward compatibility includes considerations like how ITR would decide >> which >> encapsulation to use while sending out packet for a particular remote EID >> (i.e. that >> ETR will be able to decapsulate it). > > So the question is how does a border router know if the router in the other > side implements the multiplexing mechanism, right?
You could also use the “Encapsulation Format” LCAF type which tells the ITR, on a lookup what the ETR is willing to accept. We COULD treat this new capability as a different encapsulation type. Dino _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
