> Looking at the map-reply message format, I am concerned about its
> size. By my count, it's 40 bytes to provide one record with one
> locator where record and locator are 8 bytes. If we need to scale a
> system to billions of nodes this overhead could be an issue even if
> it's the control plane. Is there any plan to have a compressed version
> of this. For instance ,if there is only one RLOC returned wouldn't the
> priorities and weights be useless?

My comment about this spec is that you really don’t need a LCAF format to 
format the addresses. You can use AFI=2 and use IPv6 format. That will reduce 
the size.

But if you start compressing out fields, reality will set in and new features 
will be added and you’ll be back where we started. You want to multi-home, 
don’t you?

Dino

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to