IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Rechartering Thread 2: From Experimental to ST: these are a bunch of RFC that may be considered

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Wed, 15 March 2023 08:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
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 90A95C14CF1F for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20210112.gappssmtp.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 4TJO2_fLjXQp for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x441.google.com (mail-wr1-x441.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::441]) (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 ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F825C14CF15 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x441.google.com with SMTP id l1so16520861wry.12 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; t=1678870060; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pbOiJlHs+BszrF+UGDYInfygwuWKKiSDTg2afUDeYiQ=; b=aWh2ug54tXKVHNKzGaETiQaMwl9BzRYFKN1walL6V/S8Aqijc5Q/tlt7maUDOrvjpJ rk76kLwvx9344y8vIE5LA+KCanMRqI2m2f10zqKWcNnPlYc30O2X6HtK1mcrhUJrhK+a O/ywVa3io1gG57kD0t4W3YuMlYqWpYAj5R30xj0eUC/d9DgLhSstzI7k7aCirX/zZWiC HmefHljqOw4oV6EbwJL3eOzCewKWcYZuIV+KQTl2ByLAteSyplJ+DxWH4djz6/TViR2M cUTU1BDHgtP6o0o4vEdFP/HSyjNNF5etdyJZ/sKUhB9reUA6MC8pYOFrQaHLfoqALMcC oubA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678870060; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pbOiJlHs+BszrF+UGDYInfygwuWKKiSDTg2afUDeYiQ=; b=PNwuoKxU9w7UvUtrwbL2C7WWBuPGi07yoOkrZY0MCNPXIsuwnR5P6DL70jVsU+uXGk cCXhGSLPFGhvSbixDI/d66Mrgl5Q5P+DYV3NH4EFm45mAuXkCTGXOTFVZeNzDV6PFyNB f7kWTUlWI/eYov26KPDzDGADm+bY/vi1m069i4MEZNjGwK9C+qkJ4TBmEbeJQhARKfKx MckBFUZebsBVUngoBWhpExo/z5Cu2ZhrWcY+zYpDsPAZJQ6RbJ0uzHyNQ4qSe4vEMI4y fmvbsRJQharpHMk8k4siRNyClAxA6TSJZ1VN5q5chON/+lGRkedZqCONSq5YwyV4FdsD ZJvw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKViRpKd5hMYKcj2NfsFb6z8LnCah5URXTqNW1ncOKAviYAXEBA+ 37+yyevSK/SPwBp6tGTfssQPEg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/1mVthdHyDnyP2lKyInDYiwkLdVy2E8vJ9bakOMOv5GNWGwpmiwSGqp05G+xLuP2vTnXNGtg==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:f390:0:b0:2cf:e18f:7e7f with SMTP id m16-20020adff390000000b002cfe18f7e7fmr1172653wro.25.1678870060407; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([37.174.68.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b15-20020adff90f000000b002cfe0ab1246sm4028555wrr.20.2023.03.15.01.47.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Mar 2023 01:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <7EB3218F-B5D5-4EE8-B115-0632F42C5E3C@getnexar.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 09:47:27 +0100
Cc: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>, lisp-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6D96CBF5-A61B-4DA2-B673-99C21A4E1A44@gigix.net>
References: <5D6B421D-4847-45F2-97BD-3670EA1D5BF0@gmail.com> <7EB3218F-B5D5-4EE8-B115-0632F42C5E3C@getnexar.com>
To: Sharon Barkai <sharon.barkai@getnexar.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.400.51.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/mAsk0rc0jQ7dx3aw2-cAIENpb-w>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Rechartering Thread 2: From Experimental to ST: these are a bunch of RFC that may be considered
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: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:47:44 -0000

Hi Sharon,

If I understand correctly this is a list of real deployments that clearly show that  indeed there are a bunch of documents for which it makes totally sense to be moved to ST.

Am I correct?

Ciao

L.
 

> On 15 Mar 2023, at 09:05, Sharon Barkai <sharon.barkai@getnexar.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> A full solution project example hopefully all addressing, encapsulation, mcast, and security items are in charter (adopted and wg last call)
> 
> <image0.jpeg>
> 
> 
> Cost reduction of infotainment data:
> - Infotainment connected to Internet
> - Using public OEM IP address space
> - Vehicles toggle wifi/cellular RLOC
> - Seamless to the Internet sessions
> 
> Automotive Edge Compute Applications:
> - Dynamic HdMapping while vehicles Driving
> - Regional Ad-Hoc Datacenter while Parked 
> - Edge Geo Agents’  EIDs are based on H3 
> - Vehicle (far-edge) AI EIDs are ephemeral 
> 
> The value: 
> - realtime automatic map generation, increase safety, reduced corner cases 
> - mobile edge location capacity multiplied by engaging available far-edge-ai 
> 
> 
> 
> --szb
> Cell: +972.53.2470068
> WhatsApp: +1.650.492.0794
> 
>> On Mar 14, 2023, at 21:38, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi LISP WG,
>>> 
>>> As for the subject, this email starts the discussion about: From Experimental to ST: these are a bunch of RFC that may be considered to move ST
>>> 
>>> There are a few experimental RFCs which is worth to be considered to be moved to standard track (if we have documented deployment experience), namely:
>>> 
>>> RFC 6832: Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) and Non-LISP Sites
>>> RFC 8060: LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) [This is largely used and may be merged with 9306]
>>> RFC 8111: Locator/ID Separation Protocol Delegated Database Tree (LISP-DDT) [The only scalable Mapping System so far…..] 
>> 
>> Agree.
>> 
>>> Multicast can be another one work item. 
>>> RFC 6831: The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) for Multicast Environments
>>> RFC 8378: Signal-Free Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Multicast 
>> 
>> The new draft that Prasad submitted this week makes it a trio with the above to. It addresses how to mix the functionality of 6831 and 8378 when there is a mix of native multicast and non-native multicast in the underlay.
>> 
>> Dino
>> 
>>> 
>>> Please send us back your thoughts.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Padma and Luigi
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email