Yes, the design you describe here makes perfect sense. I did not get this
distinction from the current text at all. So yes, please reword it. The
framework you presented in this email is much clearer and may serve as a
good basis.

Thanks
Martin

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 1:30 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote:

> > If I parse your answer correctly, the answer to my question is 'no'. So
> in the scenario where the Map-Notify is lost, both the Map-Register and the
> Map-Notify are on retransmission timers. The most straightforward reading
> of the text is that
> > - I respond to every Map-Register with a Map-Notify (if it requests it)
> > - For every Map-Notify I send, I start a retransmission timer.
>
> Let me be a bit more clear about how retransmissions of Map-Registers and
> Map-Notifies work.
>
> There are two broad cases,
>
> (1) Map-Notify messages as an ack to Map-Registers.
> (2) Map-Notify messages that are unsolicited from Map-Servers.
>
> In the first case:
>
> (1) When Map-Registers are sent with the bit set to request acknowledgment
> for Map-Registers received by Map-Servers, a retransmission timer is set by
> the xTR for Map-Register retransmissions (which is more often than the
> periodic Map-Register timer).
>
> (2) The Map-Server sends a Map-Notify for each received Map-Register.
> There is NO retransmission timer for the Map-Notify.
>
> In the second case:
>
> (1) A Map-Server detects a RLOC-set change and wants to Map-Notify the
> xTRs in the old and new RLOC-set by sending a Map-Notify message. These
> messages are acknowledged by the xTR by Map-Notify-Ack messages. In this
> case the Map-Server DOES have a retransmission timer for the Map-Notify for
> each xTR.
>
> (2) The Map-Notify-Ack DOES NOT have a retransmission timer and simply is
> sent by an xTR when it receives a Map-Notify.
>
> So having said that, you probably still want some better rewording. Please
> confirm?
>
> Dino
>
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to