Re: [lisp] Update Proposed CHarter

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Mon, 04 January 2016 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@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 4E0421A90CF for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:49:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Z7HY7maCKToj for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:49:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22e.google.com (mail-pf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::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 619E21A90CA for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id 65so161866889pff.3 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:49:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=B+Li1PsEe9BEbnL36MBPixgSGWLb/8AKB33KUxa+dOk=; b=xQ6xjOzWjzO142Fi1nzJGIpbYEDMVeRXJzkLJbfuvDwvHrvTGOoWA+DDJZ298DveiP xlF9a0CLp5DkVkvP79LXRw1oUyateuBGo+Oi8B8M7aSFVrmtPo2kDU0S6XhcizS/L1S4 8JjxeBZthnMOXJ1joZFAsPeyB86Nr3UB7AqvfabrdhuFS0OVLCSnhEsSz5EM+TS/Dz12 tCnc0MIKQAO0NhO3/RG41p9zRJxGsLrs+fBooGVSOtjX3CO5G7rZgerSPIs6wKt5f9ci ZCSWDVvQ/uo+PB0XHIQJGFgbnRfqw3Ls5zXDVx2hhgjKCn6tHYGUneOXNv7W4NlrZhyx AFyA==
X-Received: by 10.98.75.155 with SMTP id d27mr80621277pfj.137.1451936958951; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:49:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.197.31.157] (173-11-119-245-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.11.119.245]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n64sm122816059pfi.19.2016.01.04.11.49.16 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:49:17 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <08A51E69-008C-4DBE-9707-996468F46FC3@gigix.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:49:14 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8EB52655-5FF5-44DE-A286-D79E4BB423B2@gmail.com>
References: <08A51E69-008C-4DBE-9707-996468F46FC3@gigix.net>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/w8F5wPtFHX23Ngw9Q-HGBIqvxKc>
Cc: Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Update 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: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:49:29 -0000

> If the text looks good for you, please state so in the mailing list.

I am fine with the text. But I have one comment about sequencing the list below. Can we sequence the list in order of generality or importance?

See inline comment below.

> Beside this main focus, the LISP WG 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.
> 
> -       Models for managing the LISP protocol and deployments
>        that include data models, as well as allowing for
>        programmable management interfaces. These managament
>        methods should be considered for both the data-plane,
>        control-plane, and mapping system components
> 
> -       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 Grops such as  NVO3 and SFC.
> 
> -       Alternative Mapping System Design. By extenting LISP
>        with  new protocols support it is also necessary to
>        develop the required mapping function extensions to
>        operate LISP map-assisted  networks (which might
>        include Hierarchical Pull, Publish/Subscribe, or Push
>        models and related security extension).

I will number the above as 1 - 7 and feel they should be ordered in sequence:

6, 7, 2, 4, 3, 1, 5

Dino