Re: [lisp] Draft LISP Geo-Coordinate Use-Cases

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Thu, 18 April 2024 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDA27C14F5E8 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:15:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20230601.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oyZ57QTb3UDP for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x333.google.com (mail-wm1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::333]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 004C7C14F695 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x333.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-417e327773cso12421275e9.1 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1713453298; x=1714058098; darn=ietf.org; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6T8BlDlf7/qZwriAjW6dm0Rd6m7IXgeHLFpO7ZaDbVk=; b=IZYX9+28L8WjoRE1AfTAkhkGLPgt8xqeaeSBAHkSr9mC8HF1bGNaHbIDmFjcUBLpxS jGi2VeCAn7nxQyJw9LS+YRPm3VhflWYQbKbvGh4XxKeHTxGqXbTjCZsGGjvjK6QX3Jrj vT+Zm0b9yR9saNUC4aa6VTh+DjweChIYuZWTd1gIuflwb2enjhmjd8w0OtvH/VUnnP72 W2ELtPg/epuv13xT/LnQ0n3VHawXjuIpXU+mcxEbMxSq4CtHhnQXUNVC6eBkVeECi1UD 9QWVPLGjXqKVnNUDk9E4iqKCTIGLhotiHUc9tRJO4rgMD3lb59Mk2BzAC3O8+6hBJWcW H+5g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1713453298; x=1714058098; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6T8BlDlf7/qZwriAjW6dm0Rd6m7IXgeHLFpO7ZaDbVk=; b=p6KqJilKYYt36FzjrC8LLWUaNw4td7LYqLwXXTjM8mZ55dF0hniRC1MTaUFmNkezCO iWZbdRv0YUsBXh5q1/OByEc/DGIOH30tcfjdVadCts54Ms3Uft5aBy3713s+5SGDzyha j75QQIAgsBdFLoFymPWFcNAqSFtHqC2MOHNnORCaqsKPFZIfdVeWNbK905pnU/o/PteX fPQZBwB5T8q6uLSpYhVFUA0L41XNbyBTI8GCKsz/FHeTBeE94HMyMr2I4747hZv61Nek 6z1cdqOFKjVUBgv8mYdTK3bX+oIXNampaBfPaxn/TLKNrzvU5sAdEQ7SNK6+PIc7NuYk hq5A==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWvFl6S1WhTedfCiIsaebgkBKWsjwJMpXo47DT8CKaCqFVLMdIg6Pnss7YkIzAPOFez5Oo1cFC9K39Z+Xxf
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzUhgH/KWDglzPOm8PD/YT8g9XifHwSoXxTYUfm+EMZpxnwrzii /9P+1TucFqD8wRYeJ3cXBUpeHW2QYFja9OSHBIrlugPTfCCavmOByE7R/35OTQQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHYLt1RpzsJx3F4f8ayUxFwtsA/aminXrwXQq0NmFLaGwGnTSGGStWQfOl2WLlJ7V+T9KR8nQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:5116:b0:418:3d59:c13a with SMTP id o22-20020a05600c511600b004183d59c13amr1999134wms.9.1713453298344; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:14:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (91-167-176-17.subs.proxad.net. [91.167.176.17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u11-20020a05600c138b00b004187450e4cesm6879194wmf.29.2024.04.18.08.14.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Message-Id: <342E1E96-411C-4F1B-99EF-3364B141D813@gigix.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_66C85CB3-5645-4D29-AFC8-64D927686926"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\))
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:14:26 +0200
In-Reply-To: <B61076BD-33C5-44A9-BFA9-7D2BBC4D021E@gmail.com>
Cc: Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com>, "Alberto Rodriguez Natal (natal)" <natal@cisco.com>, lisp-chairs@ietf.org, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
References: <CAG-CQxorT7AKP1mAUE-0kk8B4si+gRCj-w_=jZ=y_SH=QWCy7A@mail.gmail.com> <B61076BD-33C5-44A9-BFA9-7D2BBC4D021E@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/EIujNTQQ5_ZtAas7YnbsDEDFx1I>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Draft LISP Geo-Coordinate Use-Cases
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:15:04 -0000


> On 18 Apr 2024, at 16:19, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> LISP geo-location decided to use the encoding format consistent and coordinated with the routing protocols. 
> 

Is this clearly state in the document?

L.

> Dino
> 
>> On Apr 17, 2024, at 11:59 PM, Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hello Dino and Alberto 
>> 
>> The  Yang Doctor review had comments on Yang -20 draft regarding the geoloc. 
>> For reference comment from Joe Clark 
>> As to the two questions asked here, I can see some benefit of breaking out the IANA parts of address-types into a module that they maintain.  But in its current form, I don't know that it makes sense to have them maintain it.  As for geoloc, I do see some overlap, but I am not a LISP expert at all, so I cannot comment as to whether bringing that whole module in makes sense or would even work with LISP implementations.  That is, it seems LISP lat and long are expressed in degrees° minutes'seconds" whereas geoloc does this as a decimal64 from a reference frame.  I do feel that whatever direction is taken, text explaining why geoloc is not used is useful.
>> 
>> Per Med's comment on groupings - 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/lJ7jBJzjJNY2P4sQgCcLuSnnzds/
>> 
>> Consolidating these comments in a single thread here for resolution and discussion on the list before the refresh,
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Padma and Luigi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>