Hi Musab,
First of all, sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy these weeks. I
think that I found the problem. The PeTR is not replying to RLOC Probe ,
so the xTR set the RLOC of the PeTR to down. As no PeTR is available
(all has interfaces down due to rloc probe), the xTR try to send packets
natively. Could you try to deactivate RLOC Probing in the xTR
(rloc-probe-interval = 0) to check it?
Best regards
Albert
On 27/04/15 13:04, MUSAB MUHAMMAD wrote:
Hi Albert,
I am just wondering if I have missed your reply to this email. If not,
are you able to look into it please?
Regards,
Musab Isah
Research Student,
School of Computing and Communications,
D29, InfoLab21
Lancaster University
On Friday, April 10, 2015 1:10 PM, MUSAB MUHAMMAD <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Albert,
What I meant by the statement "I receive all replies via the PETR" is
in communicating with a CN, the outgoing packets are sent without
encapsulation but the replies are always encapsulated as you will see
in the capture file attached.
Regards,
Musab Isah
Research Student,
School of Computing and Communications,
D29, InfoLab21
Lancaster University
On Friday, April 10, 2015 8:39 AM, Albert López <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Musab,
Could you send me logs with debug level 3? What do you mean by " I
receive all replies via the PETR"?
Regards
Albert
On 09/04/15 18:24, MUSAB MUHAMMAD wrote:
Hi Albert,
Yes I have and I receive all replies via the PETR. Please find
attached, the lispd.conf file.
Regards,
Musab Isah
Research Student,
School of Computing and Communications,
D29, InfoLab21
Lancaster University
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 2:18 PM, Albert López <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Musab,
Do you have a proxy-etr configured in your mobile node? If the
destination is non lisp, the only reason to send it natively is that
no proxy-etr is configured in LISPmon.
Best regards
Albert
On 08/04/15 18:26, MUSAB MUHAMMAD wrote:
Hi Albert,
I am using version 0.4.1.
Regards,
Musab Isah
Research Student,
School of Computing and Communications,
D29, InfoLab21
Lancaster University
On Wednesday, April 8, 2015 9:37 AM, Albert López
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Musab,
Sorry for the delay. Could you tell me which version of LISPmob are
you using? 0.4.1 or experimental?
Regards
Albert
On 04/04/15 19:26, MUSAB MUHAMMAD wrote:
Hi Albert, all
I have read in section 5 'LISP Mobile Node Operation' of the the
latest LISP-MN internet draft
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-meyer-lisp-mn-12#page-7) as follows:
"*Note that one subtle difference between standard ITR*
* behavior and LISP-MN is that the LISP-MN encapsulates all non-local,*
*non-LISP site destined outgoing packets to a PETR.*".
But I can see on wireshark capture that the MN sends packets to the
destination non-LISP node without the tunnels. Is this some form of
optimisation, or a bug in the program?
Regards,
Musab Isah
Research Student,
School of Computing and Communications,
D29, InfoLab21
Lancaster University
