IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] LISP Use Cases

Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@gmail.com> Mon, 17 August 2015 08:05 UTC

Return-Path: <damien.saucez@gmail.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 9902E1A8783 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 qpefZbiRurVY for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]) (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 964361A877E for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicne3 with SMTP id ne3so67736392wic.1 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:references:from :mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id:date:cc:to; bh=ydgPBDYgHsvNNx3comaSNFNV2Mo2CDPCdpW9IXC1GaU=; b=QlYp47V/RHTqkqCtTXMHgaN5jCWePRK9Ps0CZqUEfW84D/WGO9//hA/AeQhGHqdj5g KNgy+IC6jYBuAPnLnq7OFPx/9lAlldexjbph2JE5FxxOeBUePlKzhukUk5S9quDlIVdb 1My7AIlfRTqldV9fl9/HhoNjvky2Q+q3ExR2h0bSjWgtzNaGVxOIQ+69VDZpVd1WSrjR SgEPUcA1bVgKZfMe+Ty8k2IYPSaAIIZDz0GUDAgyrh/eU0dLuluoqmxDacGvSXJ2S9N1 55w4Rv6aH/0FPpAxYY2Yi8QNUWmlHNshavinsaCDDBRw0/OUlyFN9a4bxHktyJCSNkkt lIvQ==
X-Received: by 10.180.105.165 with SMTP id gn5mr30636654wib.20.1439798714396; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.18.98.74] ([193.57.185.13]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id go5sm15569799wib.5.2015.08.17.01.05.13 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-A380B06C-A538-4AB6-B613-EA6BCB77FB3B"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <77630894-48BB-483D-BE68-A15555F55CE2@gigix.net> <B1A519EE-2953-4BD2-920C-45AA21617147@gmail.com> <55C92A78.2050406@joelhalpern.com> <20E63E0C-01BC-4370-9C0D-12E11630E9AA@gmail.com> <CAHANBtK5WKh-9Ljw98JwtsAc3qtgzkMu1wuZE4a3nKmOerLJTA@mail.gmail.com> <7D1E5F8A-7A83-4158-A770-4468986EC380@gmail.com> <CAHANBtLNmXuub6Y7P1v497rGWN9TvMak7y9S_beYW6xHwkg5-Q@mail.gmail.com> <C92EE070-B694-44AE-B273-4E6BBBA70C05@gmail.com> <0BD14407-A35D-451D-B166-0D5CD36619D5@gmail.com>
From: Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <0BD14407-A35D-451D-B166-0D5CD36619D5@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <C4CB0C97-5572-428B-9367-5A643B99E051@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 08:50:39 +0200
To: "farinacci@gmail.com" <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPod touch Mail (12H321)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/TR12DGfN-y7CePR5Kmr23VjvGfI>
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] LISP Use Cases
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: <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: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 08:05:17 -0000

Perfect!

Damien Saucez 



> On 16 Aug 2015, at 00:03, farinacci@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> The logic follows like this:
> 
> If NVo3 is a requirement for the recharter, then L2 overlay support is required. If L2 overlay support is required, then you must stretch subnets. If you stretch subnets, broadcast frame support is required. If broadcast frame support is needed, then multicast support on the overlay is needed. 
> 
> And if L2 overlays are going to be supported in cloud environments, homenet, or in containers, then NAT-traversal support is required. 
> 
> Dino
> 
>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Damien Saucez <damien.saucez@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I understand that multicast and nat traversal are potentially required in all use cases, but the "must support" sounds extreme to me. Are they hypothetical requirements or real demand from the market targeted by LISP, new version ?
>> 
>> Damien Saucez 
>> 
>>> On 12 Aug 2015, at 19:44, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 12, 2015 10:22 AM, "Dino Farinacci" <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Yes, where but multicast sources as well as multicast receivers are moving. There are severl military applications for this use-case.
>>> 
>>> Agree
>>> 
>>> Stig
>>> 
>>> >
>>> > Dino
>>> >
>>> > > On Aug 12, 2015, at 10:20 AM, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > I agree we need to consider multicast. There are people that want to do multicast over LISP. Some are already doing it. This also includes mobility.
>>> > >
>>> > > Stig
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lisp mailing list
>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email