On Aug 11, 2009, at 20:28 , Margaret Wasserman wrote:
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.
This could be done in a way that _didn't_ involve a logical
interface per map-cache entry,
Yes you can do that. _But_ this means that your routing table has to
include entries in order to "route" the packet to the logical
interface in order to be encapsulated. I do not think this will help
to solve the scalability issue.
Luigi
by having the code in the logical interface "driver" maintain and
access the map-cache.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
l...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
