Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review
"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 15 January 2018 18:10 UTC
Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 6FA5B12EAF7 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:10:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
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 3g_0F7cmW3Rp for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:10:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21BE812EAF5 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:10:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A11E4A1A09; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:10:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1516039853; bh=c2qe/U+PPlDCvZPUzC780vUfW7MphGCdMgUUvqFLjDU=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=mL765WgxyjS4gE0rsLc/e1KdQroTiKiirVU+wivIjn7WyByXGNmJCAMgjzdcpqnxs /0d4jjOZDlq3XEUKPjZCdImS945M65x6aZvLz/ZsY4HNCVzUgSF3Db+4x+KOy8i/RD A6G/xd4vZbsCSNe1eMV3H6m0/WBIcpLVt+AmTJHk=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (unknown [50.225.209.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5A101C02E5; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:10:51 -0800 (PST)
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Cc: "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal <rodrigueznatal@gmail.com>
References: <907CD955-B043-4728-ABD6-5AD96192EC5F@inria.fr> <4EAD1E98-E8E7-4A0A-8300-2D185B9109CC@gigix.net> <CAGE_QexqW=q51kXR9fo_8YDu6VVUHCBz-XrGt5iZ6FOTRxDLiA@mail.gmail.com> <49EE7D2D-FC59-42F1-A93A-B315D4D6420E@gigix.net> <98C25E20-BD78-462A-BDB4-572AA24C1A97@gigix.net> <829870A2-2D90-4967-983A-56F62E765796@gmail.com> <5754BC06-9CBD-4C52-9CD6-402610EAABF1@gigix.net> <DA85FB85-45B8-4BF8-B5BC-F544E11AB90A@gmail.com> <CA+YHcKHxEJjFqm4z-PCo4LN_gv7v=mqQ7R47qPepLHJQ+kp=7w@mail.gmail.com> <F1137329-DA1F-4E50-9B94-386AC0B2B62B@gmail.com> <0F4F11DF-07B6-407D-BE5F-BBF1777D1CF2@gigix.net> <232ACD23-F1E0-49B0-983F-D17F773A99CA@gmail.com> <2241290D-29C3-4ACB-9726-ACC6DD42E8CE@gigix.net> <29E4D891-E429-4A71-BFC3-276F730EA5C6@gmail.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <80b1523a-9396-ba8c-83b0-83812984bd1f@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 13:10:50 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <29E4D891-E429-4A71-BFC3-276F730EA5C6@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/ohjht9S2P73y5tm8bMVDZWe0T-4>
Subject: Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 18:10:54 -0000
<chair hat on> Let's try to separate things. 1) The fact that the messages are used only between xTRs does not tell us whether it is control or data. 2) The manipulation of map-cache may well be control (for example, if we were using a push-based control mechanism then map-cache control would be largely control. </chair hat on> <chair hat off> Personally, it looks to me like SMR is a control mechanism. It is information to control the operation of the xTR. It is not data plane behavior. It is driven from and drives control behavior. One could argue that RLOC-probes are more borderline in tha tthey themselves behave more like data packets. Still, my own thought process is to think of them as control operations. The actual argument that can be made is that the capabilities these provide could be provided by another mechanism when another data plane is used. But the capability needs to exist. Putting these mechanisms in the control plane document makes it much easier to have the discussion about the fact that the control plane needs these functions to be robust. After all, there is no goal that these are completely separate and independent entities. Even if it may turn out that with sufficient care the control plane can be used for other things. </chair hat off> <chair hat on> (Yes, my hats are bouncing.) I would really like to hear from other WG members about this. It is the WGs document. The chairs would prefer not to simply use their own judgment. So to repeat Luigi's plea: speak up. </chair hat on> Yours, Joel On 1/15/18 12:55 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> SMRs and RLOC-probes are control-plane features used by xTRs to be able to run the data-plane. > > They are data-plane features that use control-plane messages. No other devices sends an RLOC-probe (or SMR) then an xTR. And the elements of operation are based on the map-cache. Any manipulation of the map-cache SHOULD NOT go in 6833bis. > > Dino > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >
- [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Albert Cabellos
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review - scalability Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review - scalability Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Albert Cabellos
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review - control relationship Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review (PLEASE COMMENTS) Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Damien Saucez
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Alberto Rodriguez-Natal
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Alberto Rodriguez-Natal
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] 6830bis Review Reshad Rahman (rrahman)