Re: [lisp] Proposing "Encapsulation Format" LCAF type

"Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com> Tue, 02 December 2014 17:54 UTC

Return-Path: <darlewis@cisco.com>
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 B50641A6F2A for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 09:54:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 OgR6tAR0d0-t for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 09:54:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B0941A2130 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 09:54:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=847; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1417542877; x=1418752477; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=vTVxRTzoqEKMXsjxJsFPmmcAB9PFboZfAzVT8i4VDNo=; b=KLMjErAa18/HLVfq3RRfKmRrlWRCloiSurfLAHoeYuplvEkRDVHaXgKm qQwOHXC+TqOIEt8qGiMTEEUVesBaGks9KiGcDOzfpFARQ5nYn8y4BHheJ WqEaxBtxhwVGmOgbiPymh36h5Qd/YMntpU4NU2lY5wYPAiVwjM2/dl1R9 I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiAFAJ/7fVStJV2P/2dsb2JhbABbgweBKwTNKwKBJBYBAQEBAX2EAwEBAwF5EAIBCA44MiUCBA4FiDcJ1nEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXkB4BARwzB4MpgR8BBJBhiyWVIYN7b4ENOYEBAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,501,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="101972376"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2014 17:54:36 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sB2Hsagu015395 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 2 Dec 2014 17:54:36 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.22]) by xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 11:54:36 -0600
From: "Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Thread-Topic: [lisp] Proposing "Encapsulation Format" LCAF type
Thread-Index: AQHQDlkI6forLdrh5ECeL0K3KCnx8w==
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 17:54:35 +0000
Message-ID: <44E9A1FF-4F0A-4DCC-AE76-E717404CF9FA@cisco.com>
References: <BD206B2B-8788-4595-8349-18404BE0A592@gmail.com> <AA3EDE9A-F22B-4DB7-8414-003F0875E11B@gmail.com> <DA93E662-48DF-428A-87A9-F8D8EDB08A99@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <DA93E662-48DF-428A-87A9-F8D8EDB08A99@gigix.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.253.181]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <DCFC4C4E51C1724E981A55B1D10ABCC0@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/R5SXSh4LbYFNfMiS4x7dDpzVQuI
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Proposing "Encapsulation Format" LCAF type
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: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 17:54:38 -0000

On Nov 27, 2014, at 7:34 AM, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:

> 
> About point (1) of Dino’s mail: 
> 
> The proposed encoding is based on a bitwise approach that today reserves specific bits to encapsulation formats that at this time are not WG documents anywhere in the IETF. The WG should be aware that the dependencies introduced in the document may slow down its progress.

In general, I believe this points out that we need a Registry for LCAF types that is independent of this document status.  Certainly we want to encourage future types to be developed independent of the LCAF draft’s status.  That is, I would like to see LCAF go to publication independent of any particular AF extension’s progress/use.  I believe Joel said something similar at the mic a few meetings ago.

-DArrel