> -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 代表 Tony Li > 发送时间: 2008年1月10日 18:05 > 收件人: Noel Chiappa > 抄送: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 主题: Re: [RRG] Tunnel fragmentation/reassembly for RRG map-and-encaps > architectures > > The second > > is, 'if not, is it practical to keep the full map'? Because if the > > answers > > are 'no' and 'no', it's back to the drawing board.... > > > That very much goes to the granularity of the map. If you go to a > per-host map, then I have some concerns. It would make things very > expensive. However, the number of places that would have this level > of expense is very, very small. Architecturally, it might still fly. > With regard to per-host map, even the number of places carrying full map is very, very small, I believe we still need to adopt the distributed mapping database, like CRIO or CONS, so as to scale well. CONS is an overlay just for mapping purpose, not for user traffic forwarding, if the cache mechanism is not acceptable for the reason of latency, initial packet loss or the DDoS attack risk, is CRIO or home agent in Mobile IP an option? The major drawback of CRIO or home agent mechanism is longer forwarding path, so can we use some anycast mechanism together to alleviate this pain?
Best wishes, Xiaohu Xu -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
