Re: [lisp] LISP EID Block Size

"Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com> Mon, 04 November 2013 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <darlewis@cisco.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 DA97121F9A5F for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 06:45:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dXlIJAjQ1WMT for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 06:45:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A632311E817A for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 06:44:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1232; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1383576287; x=1384785887; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=mGJGw3otEnA1o1EbSgyfH2N0l5N3eS5z4TUJtxGEtBg=; b=mKUQ1PJ2OByZT2TwxXrH2JEsHY6xnDg2zBDf90AqWlFZ+GbKtfdWoafC +8pWgj2VyHKAdtjAzqb1PriU+M9OuNXfgcDKaovh+D6cXzYz8f6UuZZa1 2mxE+I/q+DHpKtlEVshEefQGD2EtVg+Q0zYqNswl7fIWNNca2mfFuNaJR 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFAMqxd1KtJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABZgweBC789gScWdIIlAQEBAwE6PwULAgEINhAyJQIEDgWHewa+Oo8lMweDIIEOA5gKkgmDJoIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,632,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="280378094"
Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Nov 2013 14:44:47 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rA4Eikem009366 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:44:47 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.54]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 08:44:46 -0600
From: "Darrel Lewis (darlewis)" <darlewis@cisco.com>
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Thread-Topic: [lisp] LISP EID Block Size
Thread-Index: AQHO2PUZC5Jl8rx8B0O7KJbwOz1stw==
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:44:46 +0000
Message-ID: <08606A12-FC35-4F10-B984-EA39103077B2@cisco.com>
References: <20131030154454.587D918C143@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <15CC7F54-075E-4EB8-940B-8DCB198134A2@apnic.net> <E6AD700C-DC48-48DB-9FF5-A24C6121834C@gmail.com> <D68CD130-50BC-42AE-95E5-A4EBEEB20808@apnic.net> <8119249a5b4cb0604726fa7560538cf3@bartschnet.de> <FBB83D5B-E5C1-493E-8FAD-2AF489759CBF@steffann.nl> <82F5CF42-2E3A-444A-8449-39B01C0B2C3B@gigix.net> <3C9E1CFD-642E-4590-92BB-E1E5F65F8B02@steffann.nl> <92D11F1F-CED7-4A98-B45F-FD91727624FE@gigix.net> <2BEFEBB6-AD3F-4493-8628-21F273D3CAB2@cisco.com> <63AD59A6-0888-4D66-B3A7-983637F94452@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <63AD59A6-0888-4D66-B3A7-983637F94452@steffann.nl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.91.141]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <EF98F057D24EE749953788DE75A40AE9@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] LISP EID Block Size
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:45:21 -0000

On Nov 4, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
>> We see just this (peering) happening between LISP Service Providers in the US now.
> 
> What exactly do you mean with 'peering' in this context?

If a given PxTR provider is responsible for originating EID prefixes into the DFZ on behalf of their subscribers (LISP Mapping and Proxy services customers) want to widen their footprint/capacity of transit of Proxy-ITRs, they can agree to exchange these EID-prefixes and announce them on each other's behalf.

So if LISP Mapping/Proxy Provider Foo is originating 172.16.1.0/20 and LISP Mapping/Proxy Provider Bar is originating 10.1.1.0/22, and they come to an bilateral agreement to share Proxy-ITR capacity they can agree to peer (via, for example, eBGP multi-hop) and propagate the prefixes that that the other is originating.  Note that the origin AS for these two EID prefixes remains Foo and Bar's respectively.

Today some providers are redistributing registered EID prefixes directly via their map-servers, and some are using static routes independent of redistribution for origination.  (I prefer the latter, but YMMV.)

-Darrel