> > I have to disagree. You obviously want identifiers in DNS replies,
> > regardless of the solution. If you could also return locators, that > > cuts down on your startup time, as you effectively get the id- > > >locator lookup for free. Yes, doing locator updates within the > > existing DNS is an issue... TBD. > > Well, if you just publish the set of possibly reachable locators and > then detect reachability through other means than the DNS this > wouldn't be a problem. However, there is another problem: LISP & > family do the id->loc mapping in a middlebox, when the DNS name used > to come up with the id that's in the packet header is a distant > memory. Even when doing this in the host itself the FQDN may not be > available when the time comes to do the mapping. When the ITR is co-located with the DNS resolver, this isn't so much of a problem (i.e., the RLOC and EID lookups could occur when the FQDN is still available). Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
