The IP Over NBMA (ION) Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>ION Archive>month:1996-Sep> msg00138



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Unicast inscalability of NHRP

  • From: Albert Manfredi <manfredi@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:20:04 -0700
  • CC: ion@nexen.com
  • Organization: Rockwell Defense Electronics - Collins

mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp wrote:

[ ... ]

> Even Joel hoped that only 10% of all the Internet is ATM (not
> necessarily a single cloud).
> 
> But, if you assume almost all the Internet is on a single ATM cloud,
> it's OK.
> 
> Then, multicast inscalability of cut-through assures that the ATM
> network consists from CSRs with no global Q.2931 signaling for IP.

If most or all of the Internet is on a big ATM cloud, there would be no
more reason for NHRP. Because at that point, you would simply include
the NSAPA in the DNS. Then we would have nothing but a Q.2971
scalability issue, which the ATMF has good reason to solve in its own
right.

> So, with your example, there is no reason to have NHRP.

(The above quoted completely out of context.) Correct. If a very large
percentage of the Internet is on one big ATM WAN, then the easiest thing
to do might just be to try a shortcut using the NSAPA in the DNS, and
fall back to the routed path if _that_ attempt fails. Forget about
trying to transit over ATM clouds.

Bert
manfredi@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com