Re: [lisp] Update Proposed CHarter

I should have NOT said in “order of importance”. It is in order of more general to specific features. They are all important and a bullet at the end is not any less important or less priority than prior bullets.

Dino

> On Jan 4, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> 
> And this is why I tend to prefer an un-ordered list.  But if the WG wants to try to agree on a prioritized list, go for it.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 1/4/16 5:42 PM, Sharon wrote:
>> I agree with Dino, will pull up (1) though, it allows carriers to anchor access services in POPs where the MAO operations are based.
>> Cloud RAN, NFV, VPN .. type services.
>> 
>> --szb
>> 
>> On Jan 4, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lisp mailing list
>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp