At 07:19 PM 3/30/2007 +0200, Eliot Lear wrote:
Hi Fred,
You seem to be assuming that the mapping will be driven by
the first packet out the door; I'm not assuming that at all.
For inter-site communications, there will always be an initial
FQDN-to-locator resolution before a session starts, and the
mapping can be done then before any packets are sent.
Sorry, Yes. I had my head in LISP, where really there is no end host
interaction. I think that's a good thing, in as much as it becomes
deployable faster due to a smaller set of processors being touched.
But in a context, say, like HIP, you would want to do that exact
resolution for a HIT.
Eliot
This is beginning to hint at something that I have wondered about
for a while:
It seems to me that there could be cases where a router (perhaps
in a private network, or a CE router, or perhaps even a PE router)
receives some packets that already use a PA address, and some
that are using a PI address and that need to be encapsulated.
For example this might occur because deployment of LISP is not
precisely equally rapid in each private network, or is not equally
rapid in each site within a larger private network.
How is a router supposed to know which packets are using an
address that is available in the global BGP top-level routing table
(such as a PA address), and which packets are using an address
that needs to be mapped?