[rrg] [Int-area] Please respond: Questions from the IESG as towhether a WG forming BOF is necessary for LISP

[Templin, Fred L]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:dino at cisco.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:19 PM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: Robin Whittle; RRG; routing-discussion at ietf.org; 
> int-area at ietf.org; lisp at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] [rrg] Please respond: Questions from 
> the IESG as towhether a WG forming BOF is necessary for LISP
> 
> > The approach in the current LISP draft still relies on ICMPs
> > coming from anonymous network middleboxes (which Dino himself
> > has said that we cannot depend on), and provides insufficient
> 
> I did not say that. I said you cannot depend on ICMP 
> Unreachables. But

Yes, that is what you said. And, an IPv4 PTB is just an
ICMP unreachable with code=4.
 
> ICMP TooBig and Time-Exceeded message are sent and are more  
> dependable. That is, they can get lost when they are 
> transmitted since  
> they are single transmitted datagrams. But at least they are sent.

There is evidence (e.g., RFC2923, RFC4821, etc.) that
this is not always true.

Fred
fred.l.templin at boeing.com

> 
> Dino
>