IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Comments on draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility-09 from the LISP WG presentation

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Tue, 22 March 2022 18:36 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.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 E1E9D3A0F42 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 j77i0POXS72r for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) (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 7EBF03A0FC2 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id o3-20020a17090a3d4300b001c6bc749227so2929124pjf.1 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=47SEHTKVU6lRbewPHv1fZyQ6a0V2unsBoO5sMbKcOrI=; b=TalLOT46oCGgO+8Lrk7QsxZQM1DIY3vQcddQIeDfZizz9P+pNx0TqLWGHuZnB2648q BxrVOwPeyNZo5PgaYqo0cAvvh3oe1YiTEnbQMAZTYK3lqwLpgh4wvx21wE0v2RbX7unq m6ho5OUJusGTsqmAw2C7AsLiH8hVdxFqxPcCug4t+xs6QBWF/5//qMBcmmi4ElGrOBxb Zo1mWye5zxQO2YAK1ugoFFCZMSwV8WWIvLrsG7p4kD2psgY68uG17G0up+dA9bJKd3ED 2T1RfrDM51zR8glQ553yQJ8vu8LmHaF4j6bMKCQEpx6hmjBFgzTDmzdGMFQvYodr5vH2 qcgg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=47SEHTKVU6lRbewPHv1fZyQ6a0V2unsBoO5sMbKcOrI=; b=07BSpTWAhlBQQ/4pGvxxOEdc67nIZAXBjE5/MaG+PWDuPhnyQ4ShuVUZeQ92XO3/XK MJXZ0f0j9wkSsw2C99//qDrkTNUTGtHpZuh/3lqtsOXM1wO0Psths6QJ97BhByf4yLlz qsEUkY/iBu+1R4pP2FCjh7tg6Vmc5sBjQNMxbJUH5qbaQ1uVMBWRQUY87mrXJtDIhSRM 3IkDebdt6/5lMuioiSrrJHMaOTrHZmtF6Sqn7u4DOTbV00OwbzRrNEFih585vNwpQXEE U2WPHEGxxjEJCctCDUrIRO55xVISDs7HnBeEPMTfoMpS8bKY3Vu3BecyGJeoKT4tFRr3 dlEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531OEyGBF4j5mMFVht9XvrtH+HYYqqhE/CNxyM8tHhNJbbuvnOIR /v3EcSC+ixgsnuV6MyAPuEX/rWSHDxQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJycGKOAbUPrIT6iE6pWGciwbNJVf7CFTKX/JJV36NQDGwFOa5LryXVGSfHWmnhIYLSmMKbLAg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ab08:b0:1bc:3ece:bdc with SMTP id m8-20020a17090aab0800b001bc3ece0bdcmr6751797pjq.32.1647974184494; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2601:646:9600:fef0:958a:1cab:9983:78ca]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p128-20020a622986000000b004e1366dd88esm23106323pfp.160.2022.03.22.11.36.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <SJ0PR11MB5648E639AC3BC7D0ACFDDDB3D2179@SJ0PR11MB5648.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:36:21 -0700
Cc: "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A14E39EC-048C-42B4-925E-91480D91FA57@gmail.com>
References: <E3E18C80-51B9-4D38-A732-87459AF3CD41@gmail.com> <SJ0PR11MB5648E639AC3BC7D0ACFDDDB3D2179@SJ0PR11MB5648.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Marc Portoles Comeras (mportole)" <mportole@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/zh5XyN7ToTeNmafainzx3xQ-29k>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Comments on draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility-09 from the LISP WG presentation
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:36:41 -0000

> I believe we discussed this last time but, with the new perspective, couldn’t we just use the pair <IID, site-ID> to at least get per VLAN granularity in some of these decisions.

Yes, that would work better since the site-ID is in the Map-Register (where you need the xTR distinction) and the IID is in the EID encoding of the EID-record where you need the VLAN association. So this is ideal. 

> We get the same benefits: no impact on the bis document, and some extra granularity in the choice of DF or more detail when implementing split horizon on the xTRs.

Right. Agree.

> And just to complete the story. When we use site-IDs this means that:
>  
> 	• An EID registered with the same site-ID (and merge-bit) from different xTRs is merged. If site-IDs differ this is considered a move.

Correct. But you have to deal with misconfiguration so 2 xTRs at the same site advertising a different site-ID doesn't look like a move. So the xTR-ID needs to be checked as well.

> 	• For “discovery” purposes in multihomed groups: An L2 EID registered from one xTR and a specific site-ID, needs to be notified to all xTRs that are using that same site-ID

You have to keep a list of xTR-IDs for a merged registration over time. And the list is cleared when a new xTR-ID is discovered with a different site-ID. Right?

Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email