Re: [lisp] [ipdir] LISP WG

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Fri, 13 March 2009 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7544C3A6AD6 for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:35:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.165, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4a4UFWDfGw70 for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9D553A6909 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id 6975B6BE60B; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:36:22 -0400 (EDT)
To: lisp@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20090313173622.6975B6BE60B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:36:22 -0400
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [lisp] [ipdir] LISP WG
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:35:45 -0000

    > From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>

    > An EID *does* identify an endpoint's interface, however. Therefore, I
    > believe a more accurate expansion of the term is Endpoint *Interface*
    > iDentifier (EID).

When you say "An EID", you mean a LISP EID, right?

Since there are 'LISP EIDs' and 'Classic EIDs' (sorry, couldn't resist :-),
we need to be careful with use of the term 'EID', lest more confusion reign.
I think I personally will start using the acronym LEID in the future, to be
very explicit. (It's only one more keystrokem, and to me seems well worth the
work to make confusion on this point impossible.)

After thinking about it briefly, I guess an LEID does _currently_ name an
interface, not a stack - especially in an un-modified host.


I say "_currently_" because I can also see a future in which i) the LISP
'boundary' is the first-hop router everywhere, and the LEID no longer holds
any location semantics, and ii) _some_ hosts have therefore been modified so
that they have only a single IPv4 'address', which explicitly names the stack.
(Remember that in my mind LISP is not just what is in the current documents,
but also a long-term development path of which the current stuff is only step
1 of about 5 - or more.)

Although maybe that's not such a good idea... I think you want to be able to
name specific interfaces. Although now that I think about it briefly, it would
be cleaner/more correct to do that in a new 'locator' namespace (step 2 or 3
of the aforementioned 5 or so).

	Noel