Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-xyzy-atick-gaps-00.txt
Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 30 May 2018 18:36 UTC
Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E3912EA95 for <5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZIIYMsr-l8eb for <5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7204012E87B for <5gangip@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f8-v6so49654322wmc.4 for <5gangip@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=/ZocR5GPUh3Z/SoYUEhpTfbZ70Ij1Fgd2sD7wYj3gRM=; b=c5BQ9xk3IAtUvahTi9bYPKrG+KiUDkezw0qeiS92d2QvE0ARz0VNAHmXXmXKLxcrqR 3dZT6ZkTUF+TCh0hoFgChhH1JeecvGC7qNwBYN7PzQKEIhtlJFVgPXQ4watWGHF0u/pS NSB5iVqT1vfRlOgO4tX/XVI5zLPzPko7gzwEqgHzADxaOeOPb2fCzr1zoEEJwDljo72i RTUrOuezLrEZyXJVDz9fAyz8Wj6CrhewhwkXH7+DtZyVBPX3J5AxYgxKltRcsGuFrnQP baULcttx+JstwWkhcqrNWI+YtWaWlQboyic1Jv4M1K6ro95hDoM3r3stP35X2YHbVehw lCTQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/ZocR5GPUh3Z/SoYUEhpTfbZ70Ij1Fgd2sD7wYj3gRM=; b=LPUJvuGoCGFpwlTD2SHkl7hvVQDuVCC+wgGeTcZ5owicgaE7576jjskOUetSRgfX/7 8jVEzhJAHCUk/I2JlO3bJXtxdefD7aQBubweleU2HDCzF/IDCDGmWiGDZj3BoR9JVM+V zLgu1q7B+C/ZL+rMfG0v5cBLlmk7uaXXJJ7t+hQF2GVbo3VjEOW3W4c8rNj5grv6yYB4 4C71N0RdnI09HBKdxsLvfJ4EZkEzSwYEtkDz5SZbFo1HrLqXbDX26mhteJ0noWgZ2WcI FCWbfuTtgwjKNBY7K/KNKMhHSHePEILeCGXNgAgXzVcGzF+dipjJmgGh2/XKQ5E7b1qn 60SA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwfQwonh1UChloR/ymQ+JCsgcqDjZsHScFAjWcZveHhNLKzlEnUK 8jYn8the0PUIr2AT03sL1ss/Q5/cWGKecU4eP2g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKL1ktM+bAvRRBTUU6zYVpRCtW0yQtJfsdfJHfS3OkHnDas2WBAvmByUEpDoOwe7K7HqfuEzcD7BPr2XYqMMZOk=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:55c9:: with SMTP id j192-v6mr2526947wmb.160.1527705389958; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:adf:e48f:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2018 11:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
In-Reply-To: <A66642D8-940A-4A6A-A183-565B170E20C0@st-andrews.ac.uk>
References: <CAC8QAcfuk6e+JPuKC4sw=FPYSgO3Tkr5mjSRJeOzvjxUSc9xFw@mail.gmail.com> <B300114A-8838-4FE2-8FA9-95BA4CD07089@st-andrews.ac.uk> <C42C02FB-4452-4D4F-A826-F24D401BB76D@gigix.net> <45CC5F57-FD4B-4F5B-9852-93F97F08E81F@st-andrews.ac.uk> <AA3C010C-61B2-4214-ADBA-C0209E29A7C0@gigix.net> <CAC8QAcdpnUt-s=ohqQ5gmw2LPN7n17i6RVPRjzK324kNgNLtSg@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36HMf5B7cnatqmh2Sb_kK5NSG5BM_ynCkfCwJWHM88z-A@mail.gmail.com> <A66642D8-940A-4A6A-A183-565B170E20C0@st-andrews.ac.uk>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 13:36:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcf48-RPLz5E+tXt1smJPeWQ=DPtFvJJ=UNJ2pi3zcOOhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Saleem Bhatti <saleem@st-andrews.ac.uk>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, 5GANGIP <5gangip@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000170976056d70a10d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/5gangip/QCzNPpppMIV17Z1mfYpDetPLaiE>
Subject: Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-xyzy-atick-gaps-00.txt
X-BeenThere: 5gangip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of implications of the upcoming 5th Generation \(fixed and\) Mobile communication systems on IP protocols." <5gangip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/5gangip/>
List-Post: <mailto:5gangip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 18:36:35 -0000
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Saleem Bhatti <saleem@st-andrews.ac.uk> wrote: > Tom; > > > On 30 May 2018, at 16:44, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote: > > > > Behcet, > > > > The statement "For ILNP the basic deployment requires end-systems to > > be updated." is unscoped. As written, this would imply that all hosts > > on the Internet need to be updated to support ILNP. That is simply a > > non-starter. > > Good catch - thanks. > > > If the idea is that ILNP can be deployed by networks then > > hosts within that network can be updated. > > Only those end-systems that need to use ILNP need to be updated. ILNP > nodes can work in networks with non-ILNP nodes - see Section 10.4 of > RFC6741. > > > > But, then the question > > becomes how ILNP hosts are going to be able to talk non ILNP hosts > > (say servers on the Internet). For that the an ILNP gateway or proxy > > also must be deployed in the network. > > A gateway or proxy is not required. > > ILNPv6 can be seen as a superset of IPv6. ILNPv6 drops back to IPv6 when > required - the process is described in Section 10.6 of RFC6741. > > So then it is no longer ILNP. Regards, Behcet > Cheers, > --/Saleem > > > > > > Tom > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Luigi, Saleem, > >> > >> What is the agreement now as to the revision of the draft? > >> > >> I had already added some text regarding UE being alone on the link, i.e. > >> point-to-point link in wireless networks, that should make both sides > happy? > >> > >> Regards, > >> Behcet > >> > >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Saleem, > >>> > >>> On 29 May 2018, at 12:03, Saleem Bhatti <saleem@st-andrews.ac.uk> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello Luigi; > >>> > >>> Thanks for your comments - my responses are inline, below. > >>> > >>> On 29 May 2018, at 09:32, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> > >>> On 28 May 2018, at 19:16, Saleem Bhatti <saleem@st-andrews.ac.uk> > wrote: > >>> > >>> There is some text which is incorrect - on page 4: > >>> > >>> ---- > >>> Furthermore, ILNP demands a change in the way local (e.g., within a > >>> LAN) communication is carried out, needing all of the devices to > >>> support ILNP. This in turn may raise heavy deployability issues. > >>> ---- > >>> > >>> This is not true - "all devices" do *not* need to be updated, but only > >>> those end-systems that wish to use ILNPv6. Switches > >>> > >>> > >>> Switches clearly do not need to be changed since they are L2. > >>> > >>> > >>> Agreed. > >>> > >>> However, the text clearly says "all of the devices", which is > incorrect. > >>> > >>> > >>> Agreed. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> and routers > >>> > >>> > >>> You need to implement the ILCC in your first hop router. > >>> > >>> > >>> No, that is not required. I have a testbed at St Andrews and we run > Linux > >>> routers that are not modified, and are not ILNP-aware. For example, > please > >>> see the testbed experiment described in this paper: > >>> > >>> IP without IP addresses > >>> https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3012695.3012701 > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks for the pointer. :-) > >>> > >>> > >>> Then you need new ICMP messages, and few other tricks here and there in > >>> existing stuff. > >>> > >>> > >>> The new ICMP messages, e.g. Locator Updates for ILNPv6, RFC6743, are > >>> end-to-end - only the end hosts needs to be updated to generate these > >>> messages. > >>> > >>> If any on-path routers wish to examine such messages, then yes, they > would > >>> need to be updated, but that is not required for ILNPv6 to work. > >>> > >>> > >>> Ack. > >>> > >>> > >>> Other solutions are more clear because introduce new entities and > >>> protocol, so either you have it or you don’t. > >>> > >>> > >>> Yet, may be the last sentence can be soften deleting “heavy”. > >>> > >>> > >>> All new solutions will incur some sort of deployment overhead, so I am > not > >>> sure why such a comment should apply specifically and only to ILNP. > >>> > >>> For ILNP the basic deployment requires end-systems to be updated. Such > >>> updates would be deployed through over-the-air updates, as is common > today > >>> with many operating systems. DNS entries for ILNP nodes would also be > >>> needed, and the new DNS RRs for ILNP (RFC6742) are supported > commercially > >>> (e.g. by BIND, NSD, and KnotDNS, and possibly others).. > >>> > >>> For other solutions, other deployment issues exist, e.g. for ILA and > LISP, > >>> new network entities/functions need to be deployed and managed for > routing, > >>> and so, I guess, the existing network will need to be reconfigured to > >>> integrate the new functionality. I am guessing some operators may find > that > >>> a "heavy" deployment burden, but it is best that those operators > comment on > >>> whether or not they see that is a problem, as I have no experience with > >>> running large networks. > >>> > >>> > >>> Updating end-systems is IMHO a real nightmare. You have no control on > who > >>> will update and when. Network history is full of such examples. > >>> Yes, ILA and LISP has to be deployed by operators, but they can have > full > >>> control of what will happen in their own network (which they usually > like). > >>> YMMV. > >>> > >>> In general, I may agree that deployment considerations for all of the > >>> considered solutions can be improved and corrected. > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> L. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> --/Saleem > >>> > >>> > >>> Ciao > >>> > >>> L. > >>> > >>> > >>> do not need to be updated, as ILNPv6 is backwards compatible with > IPv6. It > >>> is possible to run an ILNPv6 node in a LAN which also has non-ILNPv6 > nodes. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> --/Saleem > >>> > >>> > >>> On 25 May 2018, at 15:50, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> We have submitted the gaps draft. Those who have contributed text are > >>> listed as co-authors. > >>> Please send your comments to the list. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Dirk& Behcet > >>> > >>> A new version of I-D, draft-xyzy-atick-gaps-00.txt > >>> has been successfully submitted by Behcet Sarikaya and posted to the > >>> IETF repository. > >>> > >>> Name: draft-xyzy-atick-gaps > >>> Revision: 00 > >>> Title: Gap and Solution Space Analysis for End to End Privacy > >>> Enabled Mapping System > >>> Document date: 2018-05-25 > >>> Group: Individual Submission > >>> Pages: 10 > >>> URL: > >>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xyzy-atick-gaps-00.txt > >>> Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ > doc/draft-xyzy-atick-gaps/ > >>> Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xyzy-atick-gaps-00 > >>> Htmlized: > >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-xyzy-atick-gaps > >>> > >>> > >>> Abstract: > >>> This document presents a gap and solution analysis for end-to-end > >>> privacy enabled mapping systems. Each of the identifier locator > >>> separation system has its own approach to mapping identifiers to the > >>> locators. We analyse all these approaches and identify the gaps in > >>> each of them and do a solution space analysis in an attempt to > >>> identify a mapping system that can be end to end privacy enabled. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > >>> submission > >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > >>> > >>> The IETF Secretariat > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 5gangip mailing list > >>> 5gangip@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 5gangip mailing list > >>> 5gangip@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 5gangip mailing list > >>> 5gangip@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 5gangip mailing list > >> 5gangip@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 5gangip mailing list > > 5gangip@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip > >
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… FIGURELLE, TERRY F
- [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-xyzy… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dirk.von-Hugo
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Luigi Iannone
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… David Allan I
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Tom Herbert
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Saleem Bhatti
- Re: [5gangip] New Version Notification for draft-… Behcet Sarikaya