[RAM] Question about lisp-cons aggregation

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

Hi,

draft-meyer-lisp-cons doesn't seem to have made it through
the system yet, but I have some points.

I'm probably being stupid, but it seems that you don't
actually define what you mean by an aggregate, or describe
the algorithm for forming an aggregate. Now that may be well
known within routing protocols, but I think you need to
either explain it in this draft or give a precise reference.

Specifically, in section 4 just after Fig. 2 you say

> The CARs aggregate these EID-prefixes,

and I think that needs an algorithmic description.

In 5.3.1 you say

>    If the CAR finds a match, it next checks to see if the EID-prefix is
>    the last prefix in an aggregate or is the only EID-prefix in an
>    aggregate.

I think you need to define what "the last prefix in an aggregate"
means; otherwise this description is also not algorithmic.

I also don't understand how this process (removing an EID-prefix)
fails to create black holes.

Incidentally, I noticed two cases of IPv4ism in section 5.1:
a reference to /32 (instead of "/32 or /128") and a default prefix
of 0.0.0.0/0 (instead of "0.0.0.0/0 or 0::/0").

Overall I like this approach more than NERD. Although it requires
more innovation, it seems to match the problem and minimize dependencies.

    Brian





_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM at iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram