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

["Charles E. Perkins" <[e-mail]>]

Hello folks,

I agree that LISP work should not be done in the [mext]
working group.

However, if the LISP design shows how to make a good
solution for distributed anchoring, it is pertinent to
our work insofar as it provides a model for the [mext]
solution.  In that case, if we are fortunate, it would
be easier to devise an appropriate solution by using
the LISP distributed anchoring as a guide.

Please note that I do not yet claim that LISP does
what is needed -- only that we ought to take a look.

Regards,
Charlie P.


On 8/2/2011 2:15 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> I agree with Romain's comment.
> The scope of DMM within the context of the MEXT WG is to reuse Mobile IPv6
> protocols, extensions and elements to address the concerns of the base
> Mobile IP model.
>
> Mobility using LISP may be a good solution in itself. I have no idea or
> opinion about such a solution at the present time.
>
> I believe that we can address the DMM requirements with a few extensions
> to MIP6 signaling and guidelines for deployment. Expanding the scope of
> DMM beyond the base MIP6 protocol would be taking us down a path with no
> visible end.
>
> -Basavaraj
>
> On 8/2/11 4:09 PM, "ext Romain KUNTZ"<[e-mail]>  wrote:
>
>> 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"
>>> <[e-mail]>
>>> To: "mext"<[e-mail]>
>>> Cc:<[e-mail]>
>>> 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
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MEXT mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MEXT mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>