I think this is off topic. If you want to continue the discussion,
send me email privately.
Hi Dino,
On Aug 11, 2009, at 2:05 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Why couldn't LISP be implemented as a logical interface that
encapsulates or not based on the contents of the LISP Mapping
cache and the results of mapping lookups?
Because you could have 100K of them. Interface data structures come
with all kinds of other stuff that doesn't apply here. And guess
what if you had 100K map-cache entries, the number of logical
interfaces is equal to the sum of all locators for all 100K entries.
I was talking about running an ITR as a logical interface on a LISP-
aware end-node or a home gateway, so I'm not talking about something
that would need to scale to handle 100K simultaneous connections.
Doesn't matter. You can still talk to 100s or 1000s of places, meaning
you'd have a map-cache that large.
This could be done in a way that _didn't_ involve a logical
interface per map-cache entry, by having the code in the logical
interface "driver" maintain and access the map-cache.
Sure, you are using the logical interface for a different reason.
Dino
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
