> Relative to the LISP mapping system, the terms pull-based and push-based long > predate this draft. There was an original push-based mapping system proposed > (in which all mappings were pushed to all ITRs). While we decided not to > advance that,
Right, the LISP-Decent pushed-based uses multicast. The other one, NERD, used management protocols and not a control plane if I recall. > the term had an understood meaning. Also, pull-based and push-based have > well-defined meaning in many contexts. This draft The pull-based is what all the mapping systems are using. For LISP-Decent we wanted to distinguish the pull-based mechanism based on hashing from the push-base multicast method. > seems to use those terms in a rather idiosyncratic (not incorrect, but > confusing) fashion. I am not sure whether different terms or additional > qualifiers are the better solution. Did I make it clearer? Dino > > Yours, > > Joel > > On 10/16/2023 9:40 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote: >> The LISP WG has placed draft-farinacci-lisp-decent in state >> Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Luigi Iannone) >> >> The document is available at >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-decent/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lisp mailing list >> lisp@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
