Re: [lisp] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: (with COMMENT)

"Joel M. Halpern" <> Tue, 02 February 2016 19:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C77F21B2F61; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.702
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CRC4x5YsMi-v; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 845F31B2EAC; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71D4E246737; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=1.tigertech; t=1454440927; bh=ZxqgnyzyqLbzQIgRrjgHC5zM/7PK1dOqDPxOQaQkInM=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=bA4ejsz2/WwaLndC8CMbIiBMkNU4+CcpsyBFvetq86EZWOkFJOqevz0Htd6mzP+99 DSJQxaH1NuXowHD+pdoeMLva5rNFlVM8PGywVoEV2PRINYD+ldX48Rpz42cwSHBkGo fRR5e6H6cVOsSvp2kiR/oaJy11lY285L5ZdkzZ94=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A855E240837; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:22:01 -0800 (PST)
To: Alvaro Retana <>, The IESG <>
References: <>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 14:21:31 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:22:09 -0000

I am not sure how to properly expand the descriptions of the mobility 
and multicast items.

The mobility item is specifically aimed at using the LISP Mobile Node 
techniques (for which we have an Internet Draft in good shape.)  There 
has been discussion of using that for moved VMs and for actual mobile 
terminals.  We can reference NVO3 for data center usage.  But that is 
not really mobility.

the multicast work is reflective of a series of drafts on which the 
working group is pretty close to agreement on a replication engineering 
draft and a signal free draft.  The replication engineering draft 
mentions PIM, but does not modify or affect it in any way.  And 
signla-free is separate from any other working group effort.

We can add text on each one talking about the solutions the working 
group is looking at, but I don't think that is a good idea.


On 2/2/16 11:39 AM, Alvaro Retana wrote:
> Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: No Objection
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with Joel in that some more detail on the deliverables would be
> nice — also, some of the expected interactions should be called out; for
> example, for the multicast item I would expect interaction with the pim
> WG, etc.