We could request a block of Class B IPv4 prefixes but the working group didn't want to do that.
Dino On Nov 7, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Lori Jakab <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/07/12 16:16, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> The LISP-only EID-prefix is one use of the draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block draft. > > Sure, but that's IPv6-only. > > -Lori > >> >> Dino >> >> On Nov 7, 2012, at 6:00 AM, Lori Jakab <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> Thank you for the feedback on the document, it's great having the >>> operational community participate. Indeed, the existance of PxTR's are >>> making the ping check less meaningful. How about combining the ping >>> check with a traceroute? Even if the routers carrying the LISP >>> encapsulated packets won't show up on a traceroute, you can see if the >>> encapsulation/decapsulation happens at the expected locations (xTRs >>> instead of PxTRs) or not. >>> >>> The LISP-only EID prefix you propose is definitely a good option too. >>> But if I understand it correctly, it depends on a third party running a >>> known good LISP test site. At the time of writing we didn't know of any >>> such service, so it was not included as an possibility. >>> >>> Regading deployment options, why do you consider the first and second >>> one separately? According to the ddt-root.org web site, the Beta network >>> is a DDT connected LISP island as well. Sure, it runs deeper in the >>> tree, delegating the 153.16/16 further down, but I wouldn't look at it >>> as a separate deployment option. >>> >>> -Lori >>> >>> On 11/07/12 04:19, Paul Vinciguerra wrote: >>>> Jakab, et al. Expires April 23, 2013 [Page 21] >>>> >>>> Internet-Draft LISP Deployment October 2012 >>>> >>>> * To verify LISP connectivity, ping LISP connected sites. See >>>> >>>> http://www.lisp4.net/ and/or http://www.lisp6.net/ for >>>> >>>> potential candidates. >>>> >>>> This section seems overly simple. >>>> >>>> There are three deployment options that I am aware of: >>>> >>>> ·Deployment in the Beta network >>>> >>>> ·Deployment in a separate LISP Island connected via DDT >>>> >>>> ·Deployment in a separate LISP Island not connected via DDT >>>> >>>> With PxTR’s in the mix, pinging LISP sites doesn’t assure end-end LISP >>>> connectivity. It is our experience that PxTR’s just magically make >>>> things work, and because of that, it doesn’t always flow the way you >>>> think it does. >>>> >>>> There probably needs to be some prefix that doesn’t have a coarse >>>> aggregate announced into the DFZ for testing end-end LISP connectivity >>>> for the first two deployment options listed above. If you’re the last >>>> deployment case, you’re on your own to verify end-end LISP connectivity. >>>> >>>> Paul >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lisp mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
