Subject: Re: wg last call on draft-heinanen-inarp-uni-01.txt

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:46:12 -0700

Juha:

Please find below some comments/questions I have on this draft:

1. The document seems to assume the NBMA model, i.e.,
   a set of LSPs is abstracted as a LIS, independent from
   the IP/MPLS domain which LSPs are established through.
   I think this should be spelled out.
   
2. How are the ARP messages encapsulated in case of MPLS LSPs,
   especially considering their (LSPs') uni-protocol nature?

3. What value is used for the Hardware type field in
   case of MPLS?

4. How are the *ha fields encoded? Any implications for
   the case of interface-specific label space?

5. What happens if a request or a reply gets dropped?
   How often should the request be retransmitted?

6. The scalability section needs more work, I think.

   It is not enough to say that transmission of the request should
   be randomly delayed unless you specify the time range. Otherwise
   we can have a situation where a node is brought up or gets connected
   to the cloud and every remote node sends exactly one request
   within a short period of time, but due to the total number of
   remote nodes we still have O(n^2) messages (requests +
   replies)? You also need to make sure that even in the situation
   where the requesters do not behave properly (or are malice) and
   you receive a lot of requests back to back, reply generation is
   still controlled...

-- 
Alex