Re: [Ila] BOF proposal draft

[Margaret Cullen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom,

Can you tell me how the ILA proposal differs from earlier proposals along this line?

For instance, the 8+8 proposal made by Masataka Ohta, documented here in 2004 (but proposed in the mid-90s):
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ohta-multi6-8plus8-00

Also, the GSE proposal made by Mike O’Dell, documented here in 1997:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipngwg-gseaddr-00

In particular, how does ILA address the problems raised with these proposals that caused us to set them aside at the time?

Is there an I-D that describes what you are proposing that I should read?

Thanks,
Margaret


> On Feb 1, 2018, at 8:07 PM, Tom Herbert <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Here is dome draft text for a BOF proposal description. Please comment!
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> -----------------------------
> The goal of this group is to standardize Identifier-Locator Addressing (ILA).
> 
> The problem to be addressed by this group is how to provide network
> overlays with high efficiency, low latency, scaling to billions of
> users, seamless mobility, strong privacy and security guarantees, be
> interoperable with existing networks, be anchorless, be usable for a
> variety of use cases, and have simplified control and management.
> These requirements are being driven by a huge growth in number of
> connected devices, particularly IoT, as well as the emergence of next
> generation applications such as AR and VR that have stringent
> networking requirements. While there have been many solutions proposed
> and defined by IETF to provide network overlays, including countless
> variations of encapsulation, NAT, and segment routing-- we believe
> none of these have been shown meet all these requirements.
> 
> ILA is a type of identifier/locator split that partitions an IPv6
> address into two components. One part of an address expresses the
> immutable identity of a node, and another part indicates the
> topological location of a node which can be dynamic. ILA is a means to
> implement network overlays without the overhead or complexity of
> encapsulation or extension headers. ILA leverages the immense size of
> the IPv6 address space.  In this regard, ILA bears similarity to
> Identifier-Locator Network Protocol (ILNP), however there are some
> major differences in protocol layer and the control plane.
> 
> There are three primary use cases proposed for Identifier Locator Addressing:
> 
>  * Mobile user-plane
> 
>  * Datacenter virtualization
> 
>  * Network virtualization
> 
> A recent trend in the industry is to build converged networks that
> contain all three of these use cases. In order to meet very low
> latency requirements and provide high availability, many mobile
> providers are housing data centers within their networks to run
> applications. Similarly, many providers also run cloud services within
> their network. A single networking solution with a common control
> plane is desirable.
> 
> There are two aspects to ILA: a data plane and control plane. The data
> plane includes the ILA address transformation mechanism, checksum
> neutral handling, and ancillary protocol support (such as
> considerations of ICMP when ILA addresses are involved). A
> transformation is drive by a mapping lookup on an identifier to a
> locator. The control plane’s main focus is on the mapping system.
> There are two critical problems to be solved in a mapping system 1)
> scaling to support billions of entries 2) securing information in the
> mapping system which is inherently privacy sensitive data.  The
> mapping system is essentially a key-value store database. There has
> been a lot of innovation in key-value store solutions over the past
> few years,  one goal of this group will be to evaluate key-value
> solutions for providing the mapping system.
> 
> This activity may leverage protocols and work from working groups
> within IETF including dmm, nvo3, lisp, 6man, and int-area.
> Additionally, work in other SDOs, particularly 3GPP, is relevant. Open
> source projects, particular work in key-value store technology and
> databases, are also relevant.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ila mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ila