IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Wireguard and LISP [Was: Virtual meeting]

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Tue, 24 March 2020 21:32 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
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 A78353A12DB for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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] 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 WcVOSP_qrEyn for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) (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 123B03A12D3 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id a23so7965945plm.1 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=rpW9gwUJ1NezfrpQUaYCnkEURbmvbAi0V0Mfk3E9ztM=; b=BLov3FSjCdSqUPpeLLS9SYBJO/slutAAWvhuRkopw8047xDIDjhPPIugw5E14hFQsq YKZYkYD1iuLEC6Hxw0l7NyUnTxfcyIVGVEqXfVdwfkB0lAZb34rXOk6d9t/mBdn25sgk eTdIQxM4iGZkHGAKViFx7sstdfM9w1cYfglwz2JL5xU3ptLX6ltSxTnq7vszKue6BeZP QHQ9Ou6ZsvqG1Oy9xSLQLzG886XQCrEQEIfVE0dpDsKnstTxGc/4WGZIa9kM/IJNHNwD ZImtSGnEcrBPv/tF4wA09iMqxhgBkLyrI+R+zJPQIwV3LHDhchgHSCTABAT8dPnhe990 e4Rg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=rpW9gwUJ1NezfrpQUaYCnkEURbmvbAi0V0Mfk3E9ztM=; b=dXNzpd/9uefc4ZCx/AXnLQ+6b1rvMH8G/wy5CToDDG4Pcnt4QU1f/O+bGnF7dUkf1H 4VQN9j7s4nBY9TSYJMRrgT/jrIe2xSuJqYVRZXCFRX4ziSCVCs9PMsCrsVDuumjf9YHh zT803Kd4c+R/p/CdKzJSX4f3akcK34m3LhZQ2kfIei5Rm/qRTnTwgKj6fLtV5AXdG3Zw 8YY0XjaOKFKMBQsAoPa1y4w6AgyulNfKO3hX+RQbWCZKHJK98N9S6D04B3yhw7ZRUt9c laLTbeSr4QCtbuhpZnfhAdv9L3wm8pJ8CZQ2krryRJ2Ok7df41yqQ57ZI8bS32NUqM5M XFEA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2u8OQJSVICJfNQQ98g5Mlmmhxs9Hacd9YONkiIXAZhvxHxcrW8 czHiYULnx22Oxwvi21ziHC1N7EL+M9g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvPgfiwkXp/6p/dwrIj8zsVTuw0MOYeo2jCjAcLeI39JASRpbNMP8lMiRWuCpFr4hzbHVmHyA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7e05:: with SMTP id b5mr2604plm.253.1585085525428; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:9600:af10:f5c3:e9d4:cdb4:1fa0? ([2601:646:9600:af10:f5c3:e9d4:cdb4:1fa0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f15sm6553844pfd.215.2020.03.24.14.32.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bcf659e8-c380-2d3c-d27b-46b41381c82c@ac.upc.edu>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:32:04 -0700
Cc: "Marc Portoles Comeras (mportole)" <mportole@cisco.com>, "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F550EC7D-65BD-4DF2-B276-F44B40E89BF4@gmail.com>
References: <95B658E8-B629-4E44-AB99-E9E406D11FF1@cisco.com> <39E32C9F-28FF-44B4-BE28-255199CEC968@gmail.com> <8A1B78BF-7677-4D8B-9D9B-0741BD037F46@cisco.com> <6E6DACF7-0FBB-48E6-B432-3413646EC3D6@gmail.com> <bcf659e8-c380-2d3c-d27b-46b41381c82c@ac.upc.edu>
To: Jordi Paillissé Vilanova <jordip@ac.upc.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/M5NAfIHTwqetDrNawMCO8dHkjc0>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Wireguard and LISP [Was: Virtual meeting]
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 <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: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 21:32:26 -0000

> Yes, we considered adding an IID. However, since this means changing the WG kernel code, we discarded this option in favor of a user-space solution. I agree that it would be a nice addition though :)

How about use source-port in UDP header. That can be done in user space. You lose load-balancing but you caould use 10-bits for IID and 6 bits for entropy.

> From an implementation perspective I don't think it's straightforward to do LISP in WG encapsulation without substantial processing overhead. Right now we're programming the WG interface, but if we want LISP in WG we probably need handling packets in user space also.

Well I would think the overhead would be the same as any other encapsulation. But to compare apples with apples, you’d have to put the LISP encapsulation in the kernel as well. So back to your first point.

Are there any spare bits in the WG header. Which is the default encapsulation it uses. If its IPsec, there are plenty of usable bits in the ESP/AH header. ;-)

Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email