From nobody Fri Mar 25 12:34:42 2022 Return-Path: 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 9D5663A0125 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.109 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 vhTv-WU4ZVue for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pj1-x1034.google.com (mail-pj1-x1034.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034]) (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 18F623A00E5 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1034.google.com with SMTP id bx5so8358855pjb.3 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Ml01QtbjOxm2pnXxrtHuqBpcChjwiml8b3Fbu68Zezc=; b=F/+Olfh6tEjXM9Gqa2IFImerpH/NKFgP3RkJqoBOpm2YiWRDOQqVRlFCM8oqnArzfH 4Hev3DbNV0MJOqIj6Q5VFOtWPHvNtiQwt5qRWuwIek7R0vN57pUz3WnCMJy1xUtiM3xH KCdsA9oax8tuMN0g4bYjVuj8KhFgYMjQDVA6mGUeLtoEChuSWyU0UQTUkskyiJ+97aBp pkIDGNlpKkFmypx9YpN7IfmWlKmHq+Pydz+KcZdQSyFWUk9KNT7xi9XfNYaU8OaQ7cL9 KexvR/4z305FqZdNDc20YlpbPfi9PLR6dGhhIL7cRsS0Qkp9i0vl2ASzN3nDeJ4IqEMg k8YQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Ml01QtbjOxm2pnXxrtHuqBpcChjwiml8b3Fbu68Zezc=; b=j+h/GnABsdaYdIIvrv3YORStETwyOnZX5qROtPzzIDSBBweVfkg2jfC//JehXGPI8g xTOJdmK3l0S0BDDiTnSmxqLiZJATyMF/vrkZt0YCCIZ3J/egZzc7ojh/uscXBC1YLveA kvBuqBdxqnFOSyTtVM6Vacu9YCjwQZWdNfS5piG2fwQTfCEPBuzUVsDKdKg7ULzoVFhL 5+YmQKPkjk+BjEu68KUJKK1eyPE6zjZmvHUwpkIZQ394ahM/4by4Exd3Mhkc1rnBmzIH /PAxRy853MmeC+ez2deEE5OzqdEI5UiPl+vzvY45N4Ow+ZQwquuFicdsH0N+y02x6nl8 AyPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531JRosUqWlFbA1dYRD4Zy3vFM85N6oMT/VhJO8oF9RQy9QAiAqR rGaYh1/DUjdHx8boXrznqMc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1Sdr0mFloAfiy5MJG9AZ3QzQehXFXtR8yEzyrVVGKkooPaNSuN9aXaSgAQLzad81zXY8pkQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9346:b0:14f:2b9c:ad2f with SMTP id g6-20020a170902934600b0014f2b9cad2fmr13265465plp.174.1648236875746; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-98-234-33-188.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [98.234.33.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id oc10-20020a17090b1c0a00b001c7510ed0c8sm14465790pjb.49.2022.03.25.12.34.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\)) From: Dino Farinacci In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:34:33 -0700 Cc: "lisp@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: HAINDL Bernhard X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [lisp] Request to LISP working group for GB-LISP ATN use cases to facilitate its adoption in ICAO. X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 19:34:40 -0000 > After a few aisle conversations following Tuesday=E2=80=99s GB-LISP = presentation, here is a revised list of asks to the LISP WG: I was going to summarize your asks after hearing them this week. But I'm = glad you beat me to it and refined them a bit. See comments inline. > =E2=80=A2 Bring RFC 6830 and RFC 6833 to Standard Track = (pending since more than 400 days). Yes, we are working hard on these. And now its a process issue out of = the hands of the working group. I believe the chairs are keeping close = watch on this. But I think you can count on them being standards. The question is when. > o The aviation community needs standards for LISP Control and Data = plane protocols. The lack of these standards is currently a major risk = for GB-LISP Your message was clear about that and we will do whatever we can to get = you there. > =E2=80=A2 =E2=80=9CPublish/Subscribe Functionality for LISP=E2=80= =9D - > Move from Experimental to Standards Track I support this request. I have an implemenation of the latest PubSub and = put in specific features for the ATN use case. > o More details on some pubsub operations =E2=80=93 what happens with = subscription after deregistration, explicit selective unsubscription, = wildcard subscription and unsubscription Well since the subscription state is stored in the map-server for the = registration, when the registration goes away there will be no more = Map-Notifies going to the subscribers. Except for the last one when the = RLOC-set goes from its current state to an empty RLOC-set (since the = deregistration indicates to remove the entire EID entry). What do you mean by your last two points "explicit selective = unsubscription" and "wildcard =E2=80=A6". Are you asking what happens to = these subscription types when a deregitration occurs? > =E2=80=A2 Include network mobility features to = draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility > o Add network mobility support =E2=80=93 flag network prefixes as = fixed or mobile to automatic remove all longer sub-prefixes inside the = mapping system I know two implementations that already do this. Maybe we haven't = spec'ed it well, please confirm. But when a host EID is dynamically = learned, the xTR can be configured to register a network prefix instead = of the host EID. > =E2=80=A2 Transport more information inside LISP > o 4D trajectory snapshot =3D timestamp (in seconds) + aircraft 3D = coordinates > o Digital signature from the aircraft for the AGMI Request message > o =E2=80=9CSuggest=E2=80=9D messages on foreign report received = instead of direct deregistration of a foreign link -> =E2=80=9CSolicit = Deregistration=E2=80=9D Look at the functionality that draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-02 = is spec'ing. Using JSON-formatted RLOC encodings, you can encode the = attributes you list above. We can do digital signatures for Map-Requests = and Map-Registers. Did you need it for another LISP packet type? Please explain your last bullet in more detail so we can get a better = understanding about the functionality you are requesting. Thanks for sending this email, Dino