Subject: [rbridge] possible future work: ARP/ND optimization

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:07:58 -0700

Originally, TRILL had optimizations for ARP/ND. This was taken out, at
some point (I don't remember why), but people have been suggesting
this to me as something that would be nice for TRILL to do, at least
as an optional feature.

Might we want to add this to future work for TRILL?

Radia
_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge

---

From: JR Rivers <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:42:12 -0700

Aye

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:00:16 -0700

FWIW, it was taken out because we were focusing on the core of the
protocol, and optimization isn't core.

It seems OK to add as future work at this time, IMO. I don't know what
this will result in, but it's worth finding out, AFAICT.

Joe

---

From: Jukka Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:02:49 -0700

Hi,

Sounds very good to me. As I mentioned to some people, we (my research 
group at the Aalto University) have our own TRILL implementation 
currently going through performance and stress testing, and a DHT-based 
scheme to limit broadcasting. We'd be interested to contribute to this 
work item, as well as, to any OAM work.

Regards,
Jukka

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 10:11:04 -0700

Hi, all,

One caveat - the problem statement said that:

   Solutions to TRILL need not support deployment of larger scales of
   Ethernet link subnets than current broadcast domains can support
   (e.g., around 1,000 end-hosts in a single bridged LAN of 100 bridges,
   or 100,000 end-hosts inside 1,000 VLANs served by 10,000 bridges).

So optimizations that reduce the impact of broadcast or increase the
efficiency of ARP/ND are certainly useful (and must be optional, IMO on
an individual node basis), they MUST NOT be focused on increasing scales
beyond that of existing subnets. That would exceed the P&AS, and also
exceed the idea that such optimizations are "voluntary"...

Joe

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:41:41 -0400

The ARP/ND stuff that was in the base protocol draft was removed when it was
updated from version -03 to -04. At the time, in 2007, the idea was to move
the material to a new document. Why don't I go ahead and do that,
understanding that this is just to provide a starting point and we may end
up making major changes to it...

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
155 Beaver Street   +1-508-634-2066 (home)
Milford, MA 01757 USA
[email-masked]

---

From: Dinesh G Dutt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:08:03 -0700

Yes,

Dinesh

-- 
We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by
the depth of our answers.                               - Carl Sagan