Subject: [Anima-signaling] GRASP issue 51: Flooded objectives

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 08:47:22 +1200

Hi,

Prior to raising this on the WG list, I'd like feedback from the design team.

Following side discussion with the bootstrap and ACP teams in Berlin, there
is a new issue about flooded objectives (not really about the Flood message
itself). It has two aspects:

51.1 Should flooded objectives have a time-to-live before they are deleted from
the flood cache? I think the answer is no, because in any case the source can repeat
the Flood message if the value changes. If anybody sees a use case for a TTL,
please explain it.

51.2 We do have a potential use case where more than one source floods the same
objective, and the recipient ASAs need to distinguish the results. That use case
is when there are multiple bootstrap proxies advertising on the same LAN, and the
joining nodes (pledges) can choose which one to try. I'm sure there will be others.

My proposal is to specify that a node receiving a Flood message will cache
the received objective plus its source locator (which is already in the message
for other reasons). We'll also have to upgrade the API so that the recipient
ASA can get multiple flooded answers.

Comments?

Regards
   Brian