Re: [lisp] LISP EID Block Size

Roger Jørgensen <> Sat, 02 November 2013 11:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F13B11E81E9 for <>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 04:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.29
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id duQw3tufxovy for <>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 04:47:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22e]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741DC11E8102 for <>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 04:47:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id m15so469201wgh.1 for <>; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 04:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ORwS6WZPOdKVKvf04choEF4ctmrfKdW+Ds/8skP/nfA=; b=rWjhz3CRbAex/NgyGDLA3Cn0S6u9GUCmiPQCNpZbcfllBi0G7kNeW3Zzv38/07cEvf sL77ewvp3eWrX5sjNZJ92vKv4d3BBO/oQ+cqSmN+w71/Knu2OnD24dmG40lyWp83UcEd M4+WR0ihFo27Dn75wBrojxpeGMraaAXujWuv0XXBkHxEBzpGfEiQqMSRg6ZE49eEluT1 e3d3mffcj4zM893ZnmFx8JfueXlsyymH08R3IXkdMsD2nmgBsVcT/KBfn4EjX3t0Bvww DU59BisA4aIseH9Dyk9L6RDpYXp9ggJVDoqROFgHoR/ZeEeYX9ZoUFd8ocwWlZl3lxwS G5Lg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id ub19mr5414416wib.43.1383392854566; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 04:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 04:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 12:47:34 +0100
Message-ID: <>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_J=F8rgensen?= <>
To: Sander Steffann <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: LISP mailing list list <>
Subject: Re: [lisp] LISP EID Block Size
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 11:47:37 -0000

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Sander Steffann <> wrote:
> Hi,
>> I want to ask everyone on the list: Which facts prevent a scaling experiment with the aim of global production state? In my opinion a /16-EID-prefix is perfect for that goal.
> The problem is in that what you describe depends on public PITRs, and we have seen how badly that worked for 6to4 public relays. Running a public relay costs money (equipment, maintenance, bandwidth), and when nobody pays for them then we cannot expect any decent quality. And LISP will be blamed and seen as an unreliable protocol, just like 6to4. Relying on public relays is a very bad idea.

This problem you're touching here is the interconnect, and interaction
between LISP-world and legacy Internet (as I like to cal lit). We all
agree that the 6to4 path will not work, or scale well.

For the experiments we don't really need this interconnect either, and
if the need arise the mgmt-draft can be used anyhow since it don't
really care if there is interaction or not.  However the eid-block
draft do have some text on this, but it's probably not good enough to
get it done properly. Any idea on how to address it better there?


Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE          | - IPv6 is The Key!   |