IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Draft LISP Geo-Coordinate Use-Cases

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Fri, 26 April 2024 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 15090C16941B for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zzwzv2nPVAhI for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30478C16941A for <lisp@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VR56b5s6qz6H7vq; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1714165991; bh=0vo/doVNV0UuheBxBYqbk9V7xT/HO4O/+ehnjklo6hw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=VNiHYsAi0jB5T7rlIWlH7mz17FdumvQLBOMI0GxxNIa+gZ5+t4HHIorzaFkPWF76D vrriBcgD+aDocuRQUi55vmocXrbLkrpefyhJJqNin9Xh+XmsE7jzcOV/L5TiaErwAM gpT+Ufr2r4kAOAkpElR6imWqub7TeTVyJY9aHeyc=
X-Quarantine-ID: <g4Oci5GLZIEi>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.23.1] (unknown [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4VR56b1lJmz6H4TM; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <46b85844-252f-498a-8dec-caf70cd5f5f4@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 17:13:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
References: <342E1E96-411C-4F1B-99EF-3364B141D813@gigix.net> <1D52EF56-5BB4-46C8-9FB7-89B02F9B6A19@gmail.com> <AD3EB7FC-62C0-4C42-872C-CA89EC971841@gigix.net> <434D1744-E125-4B70-92EE-D19BEC625A22@gigix.net> <0F914B6F-F91E-43B2-B1BB-DB2FF232B6FA@gmail.com> <0B735DFE-A8A3-4134-9850-3A20DAFB5A2C@gigix.net> <125E923F-C2F4-45F2-BF8B-B01532009C13@gmail.com> <847a43dd-9ea6-4d71-8dc4-596e12141d8e@joelhalpern.com> <8D26E0F6-0BCC-48DC-9738-18A4AAF0B39B@gigix.net> <AB5D0213-EE61-4918-9E7A-FE616B1C9EA8@gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <AB5D0213-EE61-4918-9E7A-FE616B1C9EA8@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/c6R1pZyAHyd4mzRvCxxKmgyoDmk>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Draft LISP Geo-Coordinate Use-Cases
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 26 Apr 2024 21:13:16 -0000

I am not following your reasoning.

I gather you decided to change the encoding to match some other work.  
But you chose not to use a different code point when you did so.  You 
simply changed the meaning, without updating the published RFC.

Sorry, that is squatting on and misusing a code point.  The correct 
remedy is for the squatter to move to use a different code point.    
Even if you think there are no implementations of the code point from 
the RFC.  (Which would be very hard to know, since no, you don't consult 
to all the implementors.)

Yours,

Joel

On 4/26/2024 4:40 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>> As for the implementations… more than the number of implementations what really matters is the deployments.
> If this truly matters …
>
>> In the lack of these conditions the only reasonable action IMO is to use a different type value.
> … then you made a contradiction.
>
> You don't want to change the type at all to respect the implementations.
>
> So that means lisp-geo stays the same and you either (1) ignore RFC 8060 or (2) change type in RFC 8060, should be our action. That is the simpliest solution without more disruption.
>
> Dino
>

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status