Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter
Albert Cabellos <albert.cabellos@gmail.com> Wed, 14 October 2015 08:13 UTC
Return-Path: <albert.cabellos@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 4E1B11B2C2A for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:13:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 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, J_CHICKENPOX_92=0.6, 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 Ggo-uNvKdTp7 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) (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 92F761B2C42 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oiar126 with SMTP id r126so23637922oia.0 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
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 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Aef4KXplPDM2Z/ywWPlpEHBdleSe8Or86f6umxK92Oo=; b=DjV64HIKu15nuKjVkX8FIG/KcWJ6uyUCIE8x9bXSFyAanOVC+D68mYzZuefaTjkJFI jYfgn91FaEVDJTBRURSchRvsZPJ1pjxxhhacNVgPFZkdSRFO48J5n97mMw4AqGDnCLRD 732rIMxcGW1mVci1Jgh1X871YGif24eWKKWIFYZcFrpVL/X0rWgTZLz7XFh+oJCZ43vY cYdO6mhmqlMd/t5HUHv2oGMQCDp2lCY452hS9VxaRdzx5fbNCWXrPefrZrzuLfMnEggJ GRS4rClzHLLIaQsgJv9db3MnB7HJNKNG9M48AnVdLgO3HcK1XZLCuPRz6OeWsMySh6fa uBqg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.169.7 with SMTP id s7mr970781oie.28.1444810351894; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.143.9 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <561D7D55.3090305@cisco.com>
References: <B25C7BF8-93D4-464E-8A3E-88720612E0AD@telecom-paristech.fr> <561D7D55.3090305@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:12:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGE_Qex6iVji+9=Fw79DeNQ+YAUpy_EcU-Yhr4NruOYADKzNnw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Albert Cabellos <albert.cabellos@gmail.com>
To: "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/jqEaLdJkPQKiWTAGE2jJSeaIW-k>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter
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, 14 Oct 2015 08:13:48 -0000
Hi Luigi, Joel Thanks for the draft, I think it describes very relevant action items for LISP. I would also suggest exploring a flexible data-modeling language as a complement to LCAF for LISP control. LCAF is too rigid and it lacks of design guidelines to define new ones. A flexible language with a clear syntax would ease deployment of new use-cases both at the data and control plane. Maybe this could be done as experimental (not standard). Albert On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Fabio Maino <fmaino@cisco.com> wrote: > > Joel, Luigi, > thanks for taking a stab at this one. > > I think it covers the relevant aspects that I would like to see the WG to focus on. > > As discussed in the use case thread, I would suggest that the draft should mention a very small set of use cases that we can use to drive the design decisions. I think that we can possibly cover all of the protocol aspects you describe if we take the following two use cases: > 1) LISP-based programmable L2/L3 VPNs with extensions to support the following services: > - encryption > - programmatic northbound access to the mapping and to xTR configuration > - SFC/NFV > - VPN termination on mobile nodes > 2) LISP-based programmable L2/L3 VPNs for DC applications > > I think these two will give a good scope to the WG work and, without resorting to more exotic use cases, reinforce the focus on the use of LISP as an overlay technology. > > Thanks, > Fabio > > > > > On 10/13/15 1:30 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote: >> >> Folks, >> >> in the past weeks (and months) there was a fruitful discussion that took place on the mailing list (and also in Prague) concerning >> the new charter to be adopted by our WG. Thanks for this effort. >> >> Beside this discussion we had proposals from WG members as well as discussion with our AD about what is practical and reasonable. >> Hereafter you can find the result: a draft of the new proposed charter. >> >> This does not mean that discussion is over, rather that we reached a first consistent milestone for further discussion. >> Discussion ideally culminating in our meeting in Japan. >> >> So please have look and send your thoughts and feedback to the mailing list. >> >> Joel and Luigi >> >> %—————————————————————————————————————————————————% >> The LISP WG has completed the first set of Experimental RFCs >> describing the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP supports >> a routing architecture which decouples the routing locators and >> identifiers, thus allowing for efficient aggregation of the routing locator >> space and providing persistent identifiers in the identifier space. >> LISP requires no changes to end-systems or to routers that do not >> directly participate in the LISP deployment. LISP aims for an >> incrementally deployable protocol. The scope of the LISP >> technology is recognized to range from programmable overlays, >> at Layer 2 as well as at Layer 3, including NAT traversal, and >> supporting mobility as a general feature, independently of whether >> it is a mobile user or a migrating VM, hence being applicable in both >> Data Centers and public Internet environments. >> >> The LISP WG is chartered to continue work on the LISP base protocol >> with the main objective to develop a standard solution based on the >> completed Experimental RFCs and the experience gained from early >> deployments. >> This work will include reviewing the existing set of Experimental RFCs >> and doing the necessary enhancements to support a base set of >> standards track RFCs. The group will review the current set of Working >> Group documents to identify potential standards-track documents and >> do the necessary enhancements to support standards-track. It is >> recognized that some of the work will continue on the experimental track, >> though the group is encouraged to move the documents to standards >> track in support of network use, whereas the work previously was >> scoped to research studies. >> >> Beside this main focus, the LISP WG may work on the following items: >> >> • NAT-Traversal >> • Mobility >> • Data-Plane Encryption >> • Multicast: Support for overlay multicast by means of replication >> as well as interfacing with existing underlay multicast support. >> • YANG Data models for management of LISP. >> • Multi-protocol support: Specifying the required extensions to support >> multi-protocol encapsulation (e.g., L2 or NSH – Network Service >> Headers). Rather than developing new encapsulations, the work will >> aim at using existing well-established encapsulations or emerging >> from other Working Groups such as NVO3 and SFC. >> • Alternative Mapping System Design: When extending LISP to support >> new protocols,it may be also necessary to develop the related mapping >> function extensions to operate LISP map-assisted networks (which >> might include Hierarchical Pull, Publish/Subscribe, or Push models >> and related security extensions). >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
- [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Albert Cabellos
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Sharon
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Albert Cabellos
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Draft of new Proposed Charter Fabio Maino