Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introduction-07
Terry Manderson <terry.manderson@icann.org> Mon, 27 October 2014 23:38 UTC
Return-Path: <terry.manderson@icann.org>
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 DD5D41A870F for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.611
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.611 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_91=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 ls7LK0-GfCiT for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-2.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72D541A8734 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.847.32; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:37:44 -0700
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.0847.030; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:37:45 -0700
From: Terry Manderson <terry.manderson@icann.org>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introduction-07
Thread-Index: AQHP8EvLn99hib0vzEiUcQ0InfWo7pxFumUA
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 23:37:44 +0000
Message-ID: <D07414E6.48DD3%terry.manderson@icann.org>
References: <6D803253-77B7-4126-8602-66E2C852E91F@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <6D803253-77B7-4126-8602-66E2C852E91F@gigix.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.4.140807
x-originating-ip: [58.107.31.48]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="B_3497333862_53683655"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/Ai-n_qLUmyuqtox4PbRGSfKeyKE
Cc: Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introduction-07
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: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 23:38:45 -0000
Kudos to the editors.. Some nits I noticed: Intro, para 3 s/and mobility among others benefits/and mobility among other benefits/ Lisp Architecture para 1, "inetrworking" - please fix Overview of the architecture: Para 1: s/LISP splits architecturally/LISP architecturally splits/ Para 1: "time of this writing" 'this' is probably superfluous here. Para 3: s/in this context RLOCs can be thought of Provider Aggregatable addresses/in this context RLOCs can be thought of as Provider Aggregatable addresses Traffic engineering Para 1: suggest: s/routing informations are propagated along/routing information is propagated along/ Para 1: suggest: s/way routing information are propagated/way routing information is further propagated/ LISP for IPv6 Co-existence" Parai 1: suggest s/LISP encapsulations permits to transport packets/LISP encapsulation permits transportation of packets/ LISP for Virtual Machine Mobility in Data Centers Para1: s/machine mobility in data center/machine mobility in the data center/ One wording suggestion: para 3: Additionally, LISP's approach to solve the routing scalability problem [RFC4984] is that with LISP the Internet core is populated with RLOCs while Traffic Engineering mechanisms are pushed to the Mapping System. With this RLOCs are quasi-static (i.e., low churn) and hence, the routing system scalable [Quoitin] while EIDs can roam anywhere with no churn to the underlying routing system. suggested Additionally, LISP's approach to solve the routing scalability problem [RFC4984] populates the Internet core with RLOCs while Traffic Engineering mechanisms are pushed to a Mapping System. This means RLOCs are quasi-static (i.e., low churn) and hence, the routing system scalability properties improved [Quoitin] while EIDs can then roam anywhere without churn impact on the underlying routing system. Other comments It could be a matter of style, but I found the repeated "With LISP .." to start sentences and paragraphs (in the first 3 paras) a little grating on me. I think the diagrams and descriptions are very helpful.. even for someone who has read a fair chunk of the LISP documents. I like the way the mobility section is handled. :-) Perfectly;y appropriate IMHO. Given this document takes a lot of work and produces a 'readers digest' version, I agree with the other comments that it is well constructed and free from technical errors and pending a few minutes to check over my comments above, ready to start the shepherding journey. Cheers Terry On 25/10/2014 10:03 pm, "Luigi Iannone" <ggx@gigix.net> wrote: > > > >All, > >A lot of work has been done lately on draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-07 and >the authors requested a work group last call. > >This email starts a WG last call, to end November 14th, 2014. > >You will find the document here: >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-07 > > >Please review this WG document. Let the working group know if you agree >that it is ready for handing to the AD, or if you see issues with it. >If you see issues, please be as specific as possible about the problems, >and if possible suggest text to resolve them. > >Joel & Luigi
- [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introduction-07 Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Marc Binderberger
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Sharon Barkai
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Florin Coras
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Alberto Rodriguez-Natal
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Chad Hintz (chahintz)
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Lori Jakab
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Terry Manderson
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Ross Callon
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Damien Saucez
- Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-lisp-introductio… Luigi Iannone