> Dino, thank you for your response.
> 
> I haven't followed up LISP for a long time and indeed read draft-...-lcaf-00 
> today for the first time.
> Hereby I saw that particular address family and as one of several choices the 
> indication of longitude/latidude degree/minute/second which was and which 
> still is the basis for what I described by draft-hummel-tara-00.
> 
> For sure, the geographical coordination information can be 1:1 mapped from 
> type 5 to my proposed "TARA"-form and vice versus.
> The advantage of receiving the unicast-locator in the TARA-form is that you 
> can use it like an incoming MPLS-label, here to offset either 1 or 3 tables 
> for retrieving the next hop info. This is much faster than running 19 binary 
> search cycles applied to a FIB with more than 2^18 entries and the conversion 
> from type 5 to TARA-type wouldn't have to be done at each next hop either 
> (and, see above,if one needs the info in type 5 form that can easily be 
> derived from TARA-form too).
> 
> Multicast, Anycast:
> In the past I also believed that there can't be a thing like a 
> Multicast-Locator. But then I developed a Multicast-model which only needs 
> finite-state-machines
> at the senderTR, at the receiverTRs, and yes at entry-border nodes of 
> geopatches. Any other participating node does only have a single 
> multicast-FIB entry wrt to a particular multicast instance. I call that 
> state-less multicast.

Since April 2008, ala draft-ietf-lisp-multicast, there has been a multicast 
locator. It turns out to be a delivery group that (S,G) packets are 
encapsulated in and delivered by the multicast-capable core.

> What is new, i.e. what breaks up with traditional IETF-view:
> a) I differentiate between a unicast-FIB, a multicast-FIB, a anycast-FIB 
> (instead of having a (one) FIB per se)
> b) Only the (already) participating nodes (wrt a particular multicast 
> instance) do have such a multicast-FIB entry which comprises just the 
> particular multicast-locator, one uplink, and evtl. multiple downlinks to 
> neighboring nodes - nothing else. In summary they form the delivery tree 
> which is also used for exchanging messages like QUIT, PRUNE, and especially 
> for new messages which are needed as to enable that all participating parties 
> (the sender as well as the receivers) can roam i.e can be mobile.
>  
> Anycast: So far no one has ever developed an Anycast-model with JOINs and 
> QUITs analogously to Multicast.

This is not how "anycast" has been defined before. So this is a new 
capability/use-case and you should probably call it with a different name.

Dino

> Don't think that I do not know the traditional understanding of anycast. And 
> there are certainly services whereby EVERY node should "participate" in the 
> anycast service without extra-joining, i.e. just by learning about the 
> potential anycast-destinations.
> I think there are enough application of either brand ( I always think of 
> well-scoped anycast when I have to drive around in Munich looking for a 
> parking lot:-)
> 
> Heiner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
> Von: Dino Farinacci <[email protected]>
> An: HeinerHummel <[email protected]>
> Cc: lisp <[email protected]>
> Verschickt: Mi, 7 Nov 2012 3:06 pm
> Betreff: Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00
> 
> > As there is AFI=16387 Type 5, I would like to suggest an additional Type by 
> which the geographical coordinates wrt longitude and latitude are bijectively 
> mapped to {square degree#,square minute#, second row#, second column#} such 
> that 
> the  meridian (east/west) and equator ( north/south) dominated scheme is 
> transformed into a fast addressable (offsetting) scheme which starts at the 
> south pole and which only knows the directions to-east and to north as by the 
> following: 
> 
> Why? Can you give us a specific use-case.
> 
> > (1) Unicast:
> > Square degree#:
> > The globe may be conceived as 180 rings of spherical triangles/rectangles, 
> starting at the South pole with a ring of 360 spherical triangles, each of 
> which 
> is limited by two longitudes and latitude 89° South from the Equator. Towards 
> North there follow 178 rings of 360 spherical rectangles, each of which is 
> limited by two consecutive longitudes and latitudes. Finally there is a last 
> ring of 360 spherical triangles around the North pole.  
> > Each spherical triangles/rectangles is assigned a square degree number from 
> > 1 
> to 64800, starting at the South Pole with that triangle which is limited by 
> the 
> two longitude degrees 0 and 1 East, the South Pole and latitude 89 South, 
> winding from there in eastbound direction, while forming a full circle such 
> that 
> number 360 is assigned to that triangle, which is limited by the two 
> longitude 
> degrees 1 West and 0,while number 361 is assigned to that spherical 
> rectangle, 
> which is limited by the longitude degrees 0 and 1 East and the latitudes 89 
> South and 88 South. While winding in eastbound direction and while winding 
> towards the North Pole, the last number 64800 is assigned to that spherical 
> triangle which is limited by the longitudes 1 West and 0, the latitude 89 
> North 
> and the North Pole.  
> > 
> > Square minute# derived from given longitude minute x and latitude minute y.
> > if  South of the Equator  then minute row# = 60 –y else minute row# = y+1
> > if West of Greenwich then minute column# = 60- x else minute column# = x+1.
> > square minute# = (minute row# -1) times 60 + minute column#Square minute# 
> derived from given longitude minute x and latitude minute y.
> > 
> > second row# and second column# derived from given longitude second x and 
> latitude second y.
> > if  South of the Equator  then second row# = 60 –y else second row# = y+1
> > if West of Greenwich then second column# = 60- x else second column# = x+1.
> > (no second square# needs to be calculated)
> > 
> > The proposed enhancement would enable a next-hop determination by either 
> > one 
> or three table offsets in case of unicast forwarding
> > 
> > (2) Multicast
> > Multicast-Locator {square degree#;  "multicast address"-number which is 
> > unique 
> per indicated square degree}
> > Well-known Multicast-Locator {square degree# =64801; standardized 
> > "Multicast 
> address" number for that well-known service}
> >  
> > The Multicast-Locator enables the retrieving of the proper entry from a new 
> Multicast-FIB entry (inside a participating node only) which enables multiple 
> concurrent next-hops eventually.
> 
> But a multicast entry will describe a set of receivers spread across the 
> planet. 
> So the concept of a multicast group have a physical presents is in conflict 
> to 
> its traditional and fundamental meaning.
> 
> > (3) Anycast
> > Anycast-Locator {square degree#;  "anycast address"-number which is unique 
> > per 
> indicated square degree}
> > Well-known Anycast-Locator {square degree# =64802; standardized "Anycast 
> address" number for that well-known service}
> > 
> > The Anycast-Locator enables the retrieving of an entry of a new Anycast-FIB 
> >  
> (inside a participating node only) which enables just one next hop.
> > 
> > While (2) and (3) specify which one out of multipe 
> > Multicast/Anycast-services, 
> at a more general place of the LISP header there should be
> > some flags which indicate the fundamental forwarding type 
> > 0=unicast,1=multicast, 
> 2= anycast, 3=.broadcast, 4=mp2p,.....)
> 
> This is going to be a problem as well. An anycast address is multiple unicast 
> address residing in physically different places. One would have a semantic 
> issue 
> knowing if an address is in multiple physical places (same as the multicast 
> point I brought up above) or an address has moved from one physical location 
> to 
> another.
> 
> Dino
> 
> > 
> > H.H.
> >      
> >  
> > 
> >  
> >  
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > 
> [email protected]
> 
> > 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to