IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] LEIDs, SPI & ordinary IP addresses as both IDs & Locs

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Fri, 19 February 2010 03:00 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6779828C0E2 for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:00:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.424
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.175, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xHxhobppLGBf for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:00:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98A6D3A7F42 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:00:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id 0F9B16BE586; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:02:23 -0500 (EST)
To: rrg@irtf.org
Message-Id: <20100219030224.0F9B16BE586@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:02:23 -0500
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [rrg] LEIDs, SPI & ordinary IP addresses as both IDs & Locs
X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <rrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg>
List-Post: <mailto:rrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:00:41 -0000

    > From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>

    > I am sure that the LEID always has Locator semantics. How else does a
    > packet with a LEID in its destination field get delivered reliably to
    > the correct destination host, from anywhere in the world?

Not all LISP packets have an LEID in the destination field. (I'm talking here
about packets between a LISP host and a legacy host. For packets between two
LISP hosts, they _never_ appear outside the sites with a LEID anywhere in the
outer header.) See:

  http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-lewis-lisp-interworking-02.txt

and in particular, Section 6.

But I get what I assume to be your basic point, that in packets to legacy
hosts, depending on exacly which interoperability mechanism is in use, in some
cases the LEIDs may have more complex semantics.

	Noel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email