Re: [lisp] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Roger Jørgensen <rogerj@gmail.com> Wed, 17 February 2016 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <rogerj@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 B45D61AD36F; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 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, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 KegObxgvJHFq; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x231.google.com (mail-lf0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::231]) (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 28B0E1A88D7; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id l143so7011005lfe.2; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=hq6M+s7DmK4Q4Zu3pn8IiCprbuSpoxvDkSlGa6Pbwdk=; b=ECwHiDzRpkWSxgGzhHf+MarvEKCAJMfmXC1Owpw7cqKdoesviZywgThyMyB29+C7/X 3bwKKtBPLeuhqp4/gSmrjyZLqHEZxdh30qaeY9ZbhYNU7a2DCsvNm8oG4KlxO4y0b08m wnIkso4ZqmLEaNpuhNVaQaHzqytYJlx7j0dXPOFuek8yLdQLWUvoV5lHOfNCLS7KJcsT YjPo5yblyiUGfgWLRxGN+0AMuQK/z1xBbGrBaoPdG43gCOsn7y3qKT6z9mCRoJ8SdGvU MiLzKps+G89yn/z1p2+m+qdJ41WSZrFPw4VYqH8fdatPZDc96GwQt/L1V3LsEMcUmAHL nsAw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=hq6M+s7DmK4Q4Zu3pn8IiCprbuSpoxvDkSlGa6Pbwdk=; b=Hij3DvRiC/MLCOgCDAVUJBDY8aUj85dhngCyaxceN/ZGcFMgzxiUnHSdDzaUqM8G/H p2QUyIVVWQ5Fe4tnVdBlTZrq+ajOQYZFWeBXyR/SlK84tjKp+K2MVyrtWjBeXMaCTNpU LhUyximgYFqz5ZtrOF3WUL31uvu69tHepZF8DBHmMSL5JwVXw6FelLpWSfrcAuKAtNpa fA9u3DTwA5Q0uCn2Z7I9gnerl3F8hOk75VIzUIGCxd4vD0Toqu1OfCcbtwWBwo2twAB0 I1dnbmaHPP+Fq3N0Qsr4thkSA0Epimq4whw/DHDw7hlVJHMi0azu96f7f4Mip7UfhPUY yI0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSRAZRsPf+1CKrpJfZ2ikb6Q78xzPFiD4m+rDFWn0Nx54W3vAa/IXcodUXyOvpbcaq5P5s9gN5oOZKHGA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.25.80.6 with SMTP id e6mr285060lfb.91.1455702363359; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.25.205.203 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:46:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <D2E90B2F.110B96%aretana@cisco.com>
References: <20160215224046.28084.69566.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1C8A2608-7564-4190-9CE6-698024EB9564@gigix.net> <D2E86D11.1108DC%aretana@cisco.com> <56C396A6.1080506@joelhalpern.com> <D2E90B2F.110B96%aretana@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:46:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKFn1SF1Q7OtKQa=pA4JLDe4fCGm+M3TUGHMT+5fRUGeZkQQ_Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_J=C3=B8rgensen?= <rogerj@gmail.com>
To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/bWzMbWLsgUJvlxBJqzXwK9OgILQ>
Cc: "draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block@ietf.org>, "lisp-chairs@ietf.org" <lisp-chairs@ietf.org>, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:46:07 -0000

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana)
<aretana@cisco.com> wrote:
> On 2/16/16, 4:37 PM, "iesg on behalf of Joel M. Halpern"
> <iesg-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>>To phrase the experiment judgment differently, either after tree years
>>there will be sufficient demonstrated value to justify a permanent
>>allocation, or there won't.  It would take a strange situation to extend
>>the experimental allocation (although of course we can not foresee every
>>possible situation.)
>>
>>Since I do not expect the IESG to commit to specific criteria (other
>>than those already documented in RFCs) for granting the permanent
>>allocation, I don't see much that can be said.
>>
>>If you really want, I suppose that we could add a sentence saying that
>>after the experiment, permanent allocation will be evaluated using the
>>usual criteria for such requests.
>
> The point I'm trying to make is about the evaluation of what you call
> "sufficient demonstrated value".  As you say, the allocation is justified
> if value is demonstrated, how is that value demonstrated?
>
> At this point in time the allocation is being made temporarily so that an
> experiment can be run.  What is the success criteria for that experiment?

I understand what you ask for, but I have no idea on how to formulate such
criteria.

What I am personally quite sure about is that the amount of
assignment made from this allocation alone will not be a justification for
granting this a permanent allocation. We could end up with very few
assigment but the technical gain is significant.

So, this experiment end in 3years time automatically and before that
LISP-WG will either 1.) let it expire, 2.) ask for an extension  or
3.) ask for a permanent allocation.

For option 2 or 3 to happen someone will have to present a draft that
can justify it technical, or option 1 will happen. Either way we would
have learned something from it I hope.



-- 

Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE
rogerj@gmail.com          | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no   | roger@jorgensen.no