[Int-area] ILA and int-area

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 13 May 2017 17:45 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B32126B7E for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y2pik7ze2tJO for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (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 C9848126D05 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id u75so68730809qka.3 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=P5FYBKZuVPwMJQ7f3K02I+bDBW9uerJAWj0DxndCLH4=; b=Chooje5cWjANIw73mp8mjil0mjObQ48h6n+PSmMfAkAhInCj0RxS7kYrHIt63OXDk3 JzwFf1onRdzxq5emqmGtpgn/hEre105bfifuptJVMmGPzADMRAVvKDfEbXl6yClPEF9w oKdpFx+N1FjEU4VIKCcQdrdkoFzqaa6eeT9bZV6W2wI2giOWJvsuw3yrOfFQZuCBMFJ+ e5kCyXCmN80LAJsbs8hIoyoODZR8mDER3STatRvskLHRbcMu1QtSrojgDvbWgfYwFzr2 84IP5AsrlyMoQWtKnnFABeGaf9dyWMYzcR4l+jAMJGLtmLJ1wtaggfay7EHJ3laqyafo bYlw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=P5FYBKZuVPwMJQ7f3K02I+bDBW9uerJAWj0DxndCLH4=; b=BAi0YlZNt0GbFSsvvmeFMnbyz7MsqGbV3mMCpAXQ9K+4xxs8wbpix/AtMu0r6xmiAg giLU4tbQu+hF4dUxtpmoVvJhDXEG3vTpxafGLDNfbyiAuT0mmJApQ5LA84Ur5xzVy86R 41R/sZkUSnb8g33aOUI1SI6wO8rP2OnD2K+pxb2uMrKU4X3I6j5ioqPJioFhZtETKLnC M63W7A5d0HyZdJNR5kNdGYCaM6mypmi6nuX7DDiKwbU8uXPmV05Ws1W5B85KaxU6kOgy J+5juWqmGkMvGTqUAubiHDoeuUpnqkH0xkQmf0assyvr3Jf7ijd17i3sMjtZKSavLtlM Bxsw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDrLHQrZpdejf8qDf92f9ZJbj9UpYosRKjjyqNph8XquIIpzWn0 6BqfxDqbDzIIhBTUzPSB8knUYij1Ew==
X-Received: by with SMTP id p89mr8536049qki.34.1494697365872; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:42:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 13 May 2017 10:42:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 10:42:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S34A5k_DtEb7YWQs=Y79p4rCpe-9Hg3_YiqbOSyWzqepYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Cc: Petr Lapukhov <petr@fb.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/-86G86Wt1P1-qBMi33VA_lzZpm8>
Subject: [Int-area] ILA and int-area
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 17:45:25 -0000


At the Chicago WG meeting I made a request that ILA be taken up as a
WG item in int-area. The WG chairs and AD requested that we raise a
discussion on the list about what else is needed to be done for ILA
(Identifier Locator Addressing draft-herbert-nvo3-ila-04). The
question was also raised if int-area is the right WG for ILA or if it
should have a BOF.

The current draft of ILA describes the data plane and addressing, a
model for ILA for ILA routing and network topology, several use case
scenarios on how ILA might be applied, a format for identifiers to
allow different types of identifiers and checksum neutral mapping. As
I mentioned we intend to make the last one optional so that
administrators can choose how structure the 64 bit identifiers as they
see fit-- this will be reflected in the next version of the draft.

The draft explicitly does not define a specific control plane (e.g.
routing protocol) for ILA and I don't think that it should. IMO ILA
would be better served to allow various methods that are protocol
generic where ILA could be a use case of those mechanisms. For
instance, draft-lapukhov-bgp-ila-afi-02 describes and extension for
BGP. Similarly, if a protocol agnostic control plane is developed in
IDEAS or in nvo3, then ILA could be one use case for those. I would
think the control plane seems more appropriate to be in routing area
than int-area.

As for what is still missing in the core ILA draft, besides making
typed identifiers optional, I think it is fairly complete for the data
plane description. It is being deployed in a least on datacenter for
network virtualization, and it is being discussed as part of a
solution to support IP mobility (see 5GandIP discussions).