60 likes | 184 Vues
The LISP interoperability tests conducted at IETF 76 in Hiroshima included four different implementations. The tests, held in the terminal room on Monday evening, showed that most combinations interoperate successfully, although two implementation bugs were identified. Issues affecting interoperability have been recognized and addressed, with later verification of interoperability. Key aspects covered include RLOC reachability, support for RLOC probes, and static/dynamic map cache entries in various environments including Cisco NX-OS and OpenLISP.
E N D
LISP Interoperability Testing Margaret Wasserman mrw@sandstorm.net IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan
Interoperability Tests • Held in IETF terminal room on Monday evening • Four implementations represented • Most combinations did interoperate • Two implementation bugs found • Other reasons for lack of interoperability are well-understood • Some issues were addressed and interoperability verified later in the week
Cisco LISP Cisco NX-OS Control and data planes Static and dynamic map cache entries Echo nonce, RLOC probe, RLOC reachability IPv4, IPv6, Cross-AFI OpenLISP FreeBSD 7.x kernel Data plane only Static map cache entries RLOC reachability, map versioning IPv4, IPv6, Cross AFI Implementation Status
LISP-Click Click Java Framework Data plane only Static map cache entries Echo nonce, RLOC reachability IPv4 only ZLisp Portable C++ (Linux, FreeBSD, MacOS) Control and data planes Dynamic map cache entries Responds to RLOC probes IPv4, IPv6, Cross AFI Implementation Status
Interoperability Matrix [1] After bug fix(es) [2] After RLOC probe handling added to ZLisp [3] Incompatible map cache configuration mechanisms, not yet addressed
Possible Specification Issues • Should it be mandatory to support RLOC Probes? • If not, flag is needed in map reply to indicate support for RLOC probing • Support for map request/map reply needs to be mandatory, or static map cache entries need to be mandatory, or both