IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Draft-kouvelas-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport WG Adoption

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Fri, 22 April 2022 18:40 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 29F793A14FC; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 GA0mgsqx_1ED; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) (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 08B173A14F2; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id u15so9316404ple.4; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=yF7W7MZEC4ZQQMh68r5kNfD1JtGY+mxZ6bf1gnsdV9I=; b=fNqmYvqL0mr4J9u6aKhoYCBEkTAuBMWAjp8Q8s/kvX/Q6YydFn/zOJL49z6+AIYDB7 vmBRkBsA/GiST0V+ujGF9w3mqL6DgEZ7tvZCM1CmlTVNKZdQwIO+s1xaGRaPvm45nMC7 urRliX/ydvEyA4uT7w/3kihtHzYbQE6mAjwxsVCqm2XECJ+i+tUbahUkXi8KABUO0ZuH 4ZwtLM6wjddRCbbMrNpfcVHN2mPz9wNiM6tuTOobAz1m7wZPAJYxOSH3zetxhKQm3HPu QZ90g4ZD0WsXaSfUXqp5ShZay5hazd0uUbD7UA1tJ3pL6lG1jx2m0fQMCCEKkoRjGUcQ jZtg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=yF7W7MZEC4ZQQMh68r5kNfD1JtGY+mxZ6bf1gnsdV9I=; b=6gfN0YBCfsKqLZbVUmu4pI65jhLVnkVCj0SH7oSePJMiLa7QZwNqFD3iGTseW23pV6 /NxAlzGImOGg9DaF/sX0S7Iy1NiMsz+FPonDoE/bvfhzuKOrcvClHl8gVFny1sGlLg1d HBL4FgdEpP6Off5VRDaiINHLzLzc4kdOYvq+9zk5FsqAcWTpVF+tontsd0ttkNzgQTUO fs3x+LaozULVVk7vddg+do27fwZ6FN2rSSN3bN730GV8idrfctfOIgALh+WI0Qf706UT BS6c7No95W0uhiM9PT5tf+Uh+lpUkcOREC+sKz600gE8sU6++hMmizKWsshgFYTwx4C+ qyKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530rUXlxgaXSePZzx+m8SEp3ZIU9wTBBemi8CnmRCB7TkVKqCvCh vzadATsR39Dm2NKK9P4k2+LZJZBhovo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUTn0sNdMDRpHFFLaGgvDMbSi34XsaumrvUuacM5xTLTVp460uSEH/KB29zHVFG1y7k0TmXw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:c213:b0:15b:1fb7:edb8 with SMTP id 19-20020a170902c21300b0015b1fb7edb8mr5900236pll.172.1650652847959; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:47 -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 f187-20020a6251c4000000b005058e59604csm3269158pfb.217.2022.04.22.11.40.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <CF1852EE-3684-4093-AA53-0F450C56CA18@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5DE5813E-DD08-42D7-863B-251AE7FA8443"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:45 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMEVLzvuy2ZUS=5uzgVnj3xmF_C2LQSYOMUZ4E7xvy_GQw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, lisp-chairs@ietf.org, "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
References: <1F470969-4ECE-437A-8E1A-C005679F9422@gigix.net> <CAOj+MMG2qnYhRXEeyOOjPuaAD4ZYcvP9wyUBiqGECrzUupLyew@mail.gmail.com> <73F7376E-B22B-488A-8503-B91F11D965AB@gmail.com> <CAOj+MMEVLzvuy2ZUS=5uzgVnj3xmF_C2LQSYOMUZ4E7xvy_GQw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/UpyEkKYbZKlObey4dKvcb9XXP0s>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Draft-kouvelas-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport WG Adoption
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: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:40:55 -0000

The others know to add quic, it was part of a discussion on how to open sockets using QUIC and which port numbers to use. That text is coming. The drfat does intend to support multiple transports. Here is one excerpt that proves that:



QUIC will be added to the list above.

To answer your second question. If you use a transport layer that requires connection setup, it will slow down handoff time when EIDs are moving. So in that case, a Map-Reqister should just be sent over UDP. And on the Map-Request side you will require an RTT before getting the map-cache populated.

Dino


> On Apr 22, 2022, at 11:11 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Dino,
> 
> Before I hit sent I did search the draft and did not find any match on QUIC :( 
> 
> But to your question - yes. I see no reason why LISP control plane could not be running over QUIC. 
> 
> Best,
> R.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 7:59 PM Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
> The draft indicates QUIC can be used as a reliable transport. But are you saying QUIC should be used for all LISP messages?
> 
> Dino
> 
> > On Apr 22, 2022, at 6:35 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > May I ask for reasons not to use QUIC instead of home made UDP based transport followed by TCP ? 
> > 
> > Many thx,
> > Robert
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:42 AM Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > During the last LISP WG meeting in Vienna/Meetecho the authors of the draft:
> > 
> > LISP Map Server Reliable Transport
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kouvelas-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport/
> > 
> > Asked for adoption as WG document.
> > Call for adoption during the meeting showed clear consensus.
> > This email is the usual procedure to confirm the consensus on the mailing list.
> > 
> > If anybody has concerns about adopting this document please state so on the mailing list before May 5th 2022. 
> > Please also argument the technical reason why you have concerns.
> > 
> > Ciao
> > 
> > Luigi & Joel
> >   
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > lisp@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > lisp@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status