In einer eMail vom 26.01.2009 04:07:41 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt [email protected]:
The sub-optimal routing will only be for the LISP map-request. The reply and all encapsulated data traffic is between RLOCs The ALT is merely there to provide the correct mapping. Prior arguing with long-path, stretch etc. I have another informative question (maybe I missed something too during the discussion): Why LISP 1.5 ? Why not LISP 2 ? or directly: Why doesn't the ITR intercept and enhance the DNS lookup as to also request the eRLOC address in addition to the dest IP address? It can also intercept the respective response and store (EID, eRLOC). I also ask this because wrt my TARA solution I would do the alike: The difference is only that the eRLOC information, to be retrieved from DNS, are just the geographical coordinates of the ETR (as by experimental RFC 1712). So far I cannot see why there is a (compelling ?) reason fro the ALT hierarchy at all. Thanks for answers to my question, Heiner
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
