IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Capabilities Type LCAF - a proposal

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Wed, 20 November 2013 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5133D1AE110 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 4xvnJGIfO1lJ for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-x232.google.com (mail-pb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEBFC1AE109 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f50.google.com with SMTP id rr13so3950941pbb.37 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=f3ZGjyuabeXXgk4PVJggZ80g8HHLfXYm7tkWhT2vS9E=; b=X+XSi2ctehqpe3Ie6j/a18hJJgQllk/K5yGZwFcC3WOE/E6xevTlYIyxttx3loNjI/ xc055RkrLQBIj/l8ZzIr8V1PHLYSj6F7LxMj89dpa80MVUPlfbrENPiZ9pp4IJn8rFKc AzMjLOBpYc1ksJDodl987X4q9dKLTWjuZBI1tJTmHUO6l8lD7tVf7Xbx68x7e5zvcZJv 7jfeHJulhE8Pzyd4HOhYIrJYBqgFLK8bTyU2AXd1Z+bn4IjmPDbTAKqkclQBWVnxUTfT hVRW7+Zk1LAQSdsOMjLz4n7R50Tn7mwYz0qcTu0F9SUbCpkvmatQD1i0rhqDh22LdWsH EIzg==
X-Received: by 10.66.102.66 with SMTP id fm2mr2339422pab.94.1384975011086; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (173-8-188-29-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.8.188.29]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fk4sm44988655pab.23.2013.11.20.11.16.50 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:50 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131120184233.7C19918C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:16:48 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3D78C8F1-2A2A-4574-B8B2-0EEF3E4DF6F7@gmail.com>
References: <20131120184233.7C19918C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
To: Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Capabilities Type LCAF - a proposal
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 19:16:59 -0000

>> From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
> 
>> There is no need for a new message. That would complicate matters and
>> create more combinations to deal with when receiving responses.
> 
> Huh? Less complication than a(nother) wart on Map-Request/Map-Replies? I fail

There is no wart because consensus appears that we should not do Capability negotiation.

> to see why a new (clean) packet-type would be any extra complexity. (My take
> is that it's only illusory that re-using Map-Request/Map-Replies would be
> less complexity.)
> 
> Sure, if the was the _only_ thing we were going to add, maybe we could tack
> it onto the side of Map-Request/Map-Replies - but when you take into account
> that we have a bunch of other things we'd like to do...

That is entirely different. So what are you thinking we need to add that requires another message type?

Dino

> 
> 	Noel
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> lisp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email