Re: [lisp] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-02

It would seem to me to be rather odd to spend time working out an 
agreement for what we want to do with a permanent allocation.  We are 
defining the rules for the experimental allocation.

Is there a specific text change that would make that clear enough to 
alleviate your concern?

Yours,
Joel

On 10/8/14, 2:49 PM, Marc Binderberger wrote:
> Hello Joel,
>
>> The document is very clear that any potential transition to permanent
>> allocation would have to be discussed and coordianted with multiple
>> parties, including the RIRs.
>
> Correct, the document is saying this. Maybe I have a different idea of "very
> clear" though, all it says there must be a discussion.
> I would prefer a clear statement that these policies are ending either when
> the EID block experiment ends (obvious) or when the EID block turns into
> something permanent.
>
>
>> Equally, until such time as a permanent allocation is made, the document is
>> not declaring the RIRs to be "the " allocation authority.
>
> Agree - and I'm not making such a statement.
>
>
>> If the RIRs can
>> and wish to engage in LISP EID allocation in accordance with the policy,
>> they can.  But the document does not promise the role to them.
>
> If the document deviates from how RIRs operate then the document should not
> be valid at the point any LISP EID blocks becomes permanent. My opinion.
>
>
>> It may, or may not, make sesen if and when we do a permanent allocation to
>> specify a role for the RIRs.  That however will be negotiated then.
>
> This "may or may not" is the vagueness I mentioned and why I express my lack
> of comfort with the document.
>
>
> Let me word it differently: the EID block as a sandbox for a large-scale,
> real-life experiment to learn how LISP becomes (or is already)
> production-ready for the Internet - great idea. Beyond that I don't see a
> need for anything special or different for LISP and we have working
> procedures how to allocate/assign address space. This is also the promise,
> that LISP is blending in.
>
>
> Regards, Marc
>
>
>
>> On 10/8/14, 2:15 PM, Marc Binderberger wrote:
>>> Hello Joel, authors and lisp list,
>>>
>>> while I think the document is overall reasonably written it has one
>>> problem:
>>> it's bound to an proposed EID address block that has no guaranteed end of
>>> life.
>>>
>>> If this experiment would clearly terminate after 3+3 years then I would say
>>> it's good to go. It's not the way the RIRs have written their documents
>>> but I
>>> think that's okay for a experiment and a 6 year time frame. But the
>>> proposals
>>> allow the requested /32 EID block to be turned into something permanently.
>>> For a permanent EID block it's reasonable to assume the RIRs deal with the
>>> allocation/assignment work ([1]) and then the document would need more
>>> alignment with RIR policy documents. A simple example would be the
>>> language,
>>> "allocation" is used throughout while "assignment" is only mentioned in the
>>> Introduction. I checked both ARIN and RIPE and it's clearly defined there.
>>> It's also going too far in telling IANA to not have a regional policy.
>>>
>>>
>>> So in short (and in all honesty): not feeling comfortable with the document
>>> in the context of a potential permanent impact of the document.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards, Marc
>>>
>>> [1]: if the proposal is to have finally an additional authority beside the
>>> RIRs for address allocation then I would reject the proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:14:16 -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> The work on the draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-02 seems done and the
>>>> authors requested a work group last call.
>>>>
>>>> This email starts a 14 day WG last call, to end CoB PDT October 22, 2014.
>>>>
>>>> You will find the document here:
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-02.txt
>>>>
>>>> Please review this WG document.  Let the working group know if you agree
>>>> that it is ready for handing to the AD, or if you see issues with it. If
>>>> you see issues, please be as specific as possible about the problems, and
>>>> if possible suggest text to resolve them.
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>> Joel
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> lisp mailing list
>>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>>>>
>>>
>>
>