Re: [MEXT] LISP as a solution for some part of the DMM requirement

Romain KUNTZ <rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com> Tue, 02 August 2011 21:08 UTC

Return-Path: <rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com>
X-Original-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2828021F84E0 for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.507
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hSrWDDZsBWGs for <mext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys009aog106.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aob106.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9DD9F21F850B for <mext@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yi0-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob106.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTjhncZgl4NLS1gmBb5wk81T0tfkPFx+z@postini.com; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:09:06 PDT
Received: by mail-yi0-f43.google.com with SMTP id 12so126311yib.30 for <mext@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.56.5 with SMTP id w5mr1906659pbp.199.1312319344680; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hong-lt.paloalto.toyota-itc.com ([206.132.173.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o6sm215313pbj.34.2011.08.02.14.09.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:09:03 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Romain KUNTZ <rkuntz@us.toyota-itc.com>
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <77C2DE20B9834174B0856B541F903036@knucpl>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:09:01 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8F4C283D-BBE7-473E-8FCD-6B1CBDE8BE4C@us.toyota-itc.com>
References: <4E36F052.8050107@earthlink.net> <77C2DE20B9834174B0856B541F903036@knucpl>
To: Seok-Joo Koh <sjkoh@knu.ac.kr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: dino@cisco.com, mext <mext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MEXT] LISP as a solution for some part of the DMM requirement
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 21:08:58 -0000

Hello,

I fail to see how LISP would fall in the MEXT charter item, which concentrates on MIPv6-based DMM solution ('Operational considerations for distributed use of Mobile IPv6'). If LISP is foreseen as a potential solution for distributed mobility management, that should probably be discussed in the Network WG, where LISP and LISP MN are discussed.

Regards,
Romain

On Aug 1, 2011, at 16:50, Seok-Joo Koh wrote:

> Dear Charles,
> 
> I think the LISP can also be considered as a promising candidate
> in the design of DMM solutions. Several works are being progressed
> to use or extend the LISP for mobility support, which inlcude LISP-MN draft
> and many research papers. Actually, I am also considering how to extend
> the LISP scheme in the DMM perspective.
> 
> LISP is a network-based ID-LOC separation scheme and thus it may give some
> advantages for effective mobility support. On the other hand, it is noted that
> the current version of LISP and LISP-MN may need to be more enhanced
> in terms of scalability in the mobile environment. For example, one concern of LISP
> is that the LISP EIDs may not be aggregated anymore in the mobile networks, since
> each mobile node will have its own distinctive EIDs that do not conform the concerned mobile domain.
> This may decrease the scaling benefits of original LISP.
> We may need to design a new enhanced EID structure to be used for mobile environment.
> Nontheless, it is worthwhile to consider LISP as a promisng candidate in the disign of DMM, I think.
> 
> By the way, as I already said in this IETF DMM ad hoc meeting, the urgent action item of DMM is
> to make one or more introductory I-Ds with WG consensus, which may include
> the problem statements and requirements for DMM, use cases/scenarios, and comparison matrix, etc.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> *************************
> Seok-Joo Koh
> http://protocol.knu.ac.kr/
> *************************
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
> To: "mext" <mext@ietf.org>
> Cc: <dino@cisco.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 3:28 AM
> Subject: [MEXT] LISP as a solution for some part of the DMM requirement
> 
> 
>> 
>> Hello folks,
>> 
>> At IETF 81, LISP for mobile devices was presented.
>> While I am not yet convinced about the specific
>> solution presented, I started to look at LISP as
>> a possible component of an overall DMM solution.
>> 
>> LISP has a website:
>> http://www.lisp4.net
>> 
>> For people who are unfamiliar, this issue of IPJ
>> has a tutorial article about LISP:
>> http://www.lisp4.net/docs/ipj_11-1.pdf
>> 
>> The LISP draft for mobile nodes is accessible here:
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-meyer-lisp-mn/
>> 
>> Comments?  I think that LISP should be added to the
>> comparison matrix in my draft with Dapeng Liu.
>> Would that be helpful?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Charlie P.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MEXT mailing list
>> MEXT@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> MEXT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext