nanog mailing list archives
Re: routing table go boom
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx () gigix net>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:42:26 +0100
Hi Masataka, On 20 Mar. 2013, at 00:23 , Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:
David Conrad wrote:One of the advantages I see in LISP(-like) solutions is that it allows multi-homing without having to do BGP...By having a lot larger table than BGP. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-architecture/?include_text=1 It should be noted that the caching spoken of here is likely not classic caching, where there is a fixed/limited size cache, and entries have to be discarded to make room for newly needed entries. The economics of memory being what they are, there is no reason to discard mappings once they have been loaded (although of course implementations are free to chose to do so, if they wish to).
LISP will not have huge caches: (1) http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/69/slides/RRG-4.pdf and more recently: (2) https://www.net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de/papers/KIF-ADDITLCAWISKAI-11.pdf
Worse, the table is updated so frequently.
FIrst of all the table a cache is filled on-demand, so you update only what you need, secondly (1) shows that this refresh traffic is in the same order of magnitude of DNS requests. If you are able to support DNS you are able to deal with LISP cache update traffic.
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-introduction/?include_text=1 A node may have more than one RLOC, or its RLOC may change over time (e.g. if the node is mobile), but it keeps the same EID. Assuming that there are 4G mobile devices in the world, the mapping table has more than 4G entries each updated every minute or second.
This is true in a push model like BGP not in LISP, which is a pull model (on-demand).
The problem of LISP is that it breaks the end to end principle to introduce intelligent intermediate entities of ITR and ETR.
true
Mobility can best be handled end to end by end systems of MN, HA and, optionally, CN.
which rely on intelligent anchor nodes spread in the network, where is the difference? Luigi
Masataka Ohta PS Considering that the Internet is connectionless because all the routers have routing tables covering all the IP addresses in realtime, LISP won't be operational unless most of routers in DFZ have full mapping table in realtime.
Current thread:
- Re: routing table go boom, (continued)
- Re: routing table go boom Matthew Walster (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Jared Mauch (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Jared Mauch (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Randy Bush (Mar 21)
- Re: routing table go boom Brielle Bruns (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Masataka Ohta (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom William Herrin (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Masataka Ohta (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Luigi Iannone (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Luigi Iannone (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Luigi Iannone (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom (was: Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification) Jared Mauch (Mar 20)
- Re: routing table go boom Doug Barton (Mar 19)
- Re: routing table go boom William Herrin (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification David Conrad (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification Christopher Morrow (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification David Conrad (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification Christopher Morrow (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification Doug Barton (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 19)
- Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification David Conrad (Mar 19)