On Aug 11, 2009, at 2:45 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
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.
Or not. The whole point of a cache is that it is an optimization...
I don't connect to more than a couple of dozen hosts regularly, and I
certainly don't connect to more than a few hundred hosts in the course
of a few minutes. So, I could be pretty happy with a cache that had a
few thousand entries. I'd just have to do a mapping lookup if my
destination EID wasn't one of the last (or most frequent, depending on
my cache aging algorithm) few thousand EIDs I'd visited.
I'm not arguing that this model would work for all ITRs. Obviously if
my ISP (Verizon) deploys an ITR that has to handle all of the hosts in
Massachusetts, it will need to be _considerably_ more capable than my
Mac or Windows PC. I'd just like to make sure we also define
something that can scale down to desktop PCs and to low cost home
routers, etc.
Margaret
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
