Jeff,

You and I appear to agree that the RIRs are undesirable for the purposes of EID 
management during (at least) the initial phases of the LISP experimental 
deployment, so I'll skip that part of your message.

On Mar 5, 2013, at 2:44 AM, Jeff Wheeler <[email protected]> wrote:
> If you permit domain registrars to offer this service, some of them
> probably will, and they are able to do it more quickly and
> cost-effectively than the RIRs.

While you haven't said so explicitly, I gather you're talking about a 
registry/registrar split for EID allocation where you have a single entity 
acting as a wholesaler that ensures uniqueness and multiple competitive 
entities acting as retailers (whether the registry is 'thin' or 'thick' isn't 
relevant for this discussion). There is another model where you ensure 
uniqueness by partitioning the space amongst the retailers, but I'm assuming 
you're not proposing that.

While the registry/registrar split model isn't without its problems (just hang 
around ICANN for a while and those problems will become painfully apparent), I 
would agree it might be a viable/appropriate model _in the long term_.  Having 
nearly daily interactions with the DNS registries and registrars at a policy 
level, I have quite a bit of skepticism that they'll be at all interested in 
participating in the LISP experiment at this point in time, particularly as 
they're gearing up for new gTLD deployment and it is a bit unlikely there will 
be much money in LISP EID allocation for the foreseeable future (if ever: it's 
unlikely you'll be able to charge a premium price for particular LISP EIDs).

In the near term, I believe we want something as simple as possible. This 
implies to me that a highly-automated unified registry/registrar is the right 
way to go. Since EIDs do not need to be aggregatable, allocation of fixed sized 
blocks more-or-less on demand (very much like Private Enterprise Numbers 
allocated by IANA at http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page) would seem to 
be sufficient.

I would not have a problem with ensuring that the unified registry/registrar 
system support external registrars (perhaps via EPP), thereby allowing folks 
like the DNS registrars to start selling EIDs if they want. I just don't think 
we should assume there are going to be folks who want to do this out of the 
starting gate.

>> 1) whois, to lookup the registration data
>> 2) reverse dns, so people can map EIDs into domain names
> I think you need these items to collaborate and troubleshoot problems
> in a hopefully growing community of users.

I agree.

> Both these items are easy and inexpensive.  

I'd argue providing 5 9s of pretty much anything is neither easy nor 
inexpensive, however at this stage of LISP deployment, I doubt 5 9s is required.

> It's more challenging to
> provide a mapping server because that is a service / technology they
> are not familiar with, but that should also be relatively easy
> compared to the policy process.

Has anyone characterized the anticipated operational load of mapping service 
(bandwidth/pps)?

Thanks,
-drc

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

Reply via email to