cool

Damien Saucez 
On 08 Oct 2014, at 01:05, Sharon Barkai <[email protected]> wrote:

> We showed this slide publicly last week in TC3. 
> The catch is that current deployments are using the pre standards
> (Designed 2006) based architecture equivalent almost 1:1 to Lisp. 
> There's a total of 100M subscribers now footprint for this architecture.
> Next major release and current trials are lisp RFC based and interoperable.
> 
> <image1.PNG>
> 
> 
> --szb
> 
>> On Oct 7, 2014, at 14:44, Damien Saucez <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Thanks for the input. 
>> 
>> I guess you have such deployment, do you have some figure (numbers) that 
>> could
>> become public to show the competitive advantage of LISP?
>> 
>> Damien Saucez 
>> 
>>> On 07 Oct 2014, at 01:16, Sharon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Damian, sorry for the delay, meant to get to this today.
>>> 
>>> - Lisp architecture facilitates routing in environments where there is 
>>> little to no correlation between network endpoints and topological 
>>> location. In service provider environment this use is evident in a range of 
>>> consumer use cases which require an inline anchor in-order to deliver a 
>>> service to a subscribers. Inline anchors provide one of three types of 
>>> capabilities:
>>> 
>>> (1) enable mobility of subscriber end points 
>>> (2) enable chaining of middle-box functions
>>> (3) enable seamless scale-out of functions 
>>> 
>>> - Without using the Lisp architecture operators are forced to centralize 
>>> service anchors in custom built special boxes. This means that end-points 
>>> can move as long as their traffic ends up on the same mobile gateway, 
>>> functions can be chained as long as all traffic traverses the same wire or 
>>> the same dpi box, and capacity can scale out as long as traffic fans out to 
>>> and form a specific load balancer.
>>> 
>>> - By using the Lisp architecture service providers are able to distribute, 
>>> virtualize, and insatiate subscriber-service anchors anywhere in the 
>>> network. In addition to the efficiency and flexibility of elastic 
>>> allocation there is also great deal of additional efficiency in combining 
>>> these anchors and applying multiple considerations; ID-Location, 
>>> Subscriber-Service, Service-Instance, in one "Map&Encap" shot, or Lisp 
>>> point of indirection.
>>> 
>>> - Typical use cases that Virtualize inline anchors and network functions 
>>> include: Distributed Mobility and Virtualized Evolved Packet Core (vEPC), 
>>> where centralization makes way to distributed and virtualized inline 
>>> anchoring of mobility, Virtualized Customer Premise Equipment or vCPE, 
>>> where functionality previously anchored at customer prem is now dynamically 
>>> allocated in-network, Virtualized SGi LAN, where value added mobile 
>>> services previously anchored inside full-stack boxes or anchored to 
>>> physical wires with permutation setups aka "Rails", Virtual IMS and Virtual 
>>> SBC, etc. 
>>> 
>>> --szb
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 6, 2014, at 15:15, Damien Saucez <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> As the impact draft aims at documenting operational points, we would be 
>>>> happy to
>>>> have some feedback from people.
>>>> 
>>>> From the discussions and mails, we identified that some of you could 
>>>> directly
>>>> help in the document, more precisely, in addition to Sharon:
>>>> 
>>>> - Ron on the change  w.r.t. BGP
>>>> - Ed on the problem of middle boxes and NATs
>>>> 
>>>> Would you both be ready to provide a little paragraph on this?
>>>> 
>>>> Any other volunteer?
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Damien Saucez 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 29 Sep 2014, at 19:01, Sharon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Damian, our experience applying the lisp architecture is focused on 
>>>>> service providers network under the umbrella of what we call Lisp Flow 
>>>>> Mapping - Subscriber to Services .
>>>>> Is this domain of interest to your impact document? 
>>>>> If so will be happy to help.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Lisp Flow Mapping use cases fall into two main blocks:
>>>>> (1) Consumer Services and (2) Managed Network Services
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the Consumer use cases the Lisp architecture addresses the need to 
>>>>> distribute the "anchors" used by carriers to pin subscriber inline 
>>>>> services - mobility services, value add services, media services..
>>>>> Context is pervasive using mapping, flows are mapped to wherever anchors 
>>>>> & states are. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> In Managed network services the Lisp architecture is used to augment 
>>>>> deficiencies in VPNs for supporting virtualization, hosting, and 
>>>>> broadband access. CEs are freed from enterprise prefixes and WAN 
>>>>> functions, PEs are freed from running per enterprise routing, and Ps are 
>>>>> freed from per location LSPs. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please let  know if the above is of interest and in charter so we can 
>>>>> perhaps incorporate.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --szb
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 29, 2014, at 04:28, Damien Saucez <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The charter makes a clear distinction between the LISP architecture and 
>>>>>> its
>>>>>> impact (see charter excerpt below) so we would greatly appreciate to have
>>>>>> feedback on draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06 that aims at summarising what are
>>>>>> the potential implications of a LISP deployment in today’s Internet. 
>>>>>> This draft
>>>>>> can be seen somehow as a companion of the -intro- document that focuses
>>>>>> on the architecture and mechanisms.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank you for you collaboration,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Damien Saucez 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - Architecture description: This document will describe the
>>>>>> architecture of the entire LISP system, making it easier to read the
>>>>>> rest of the LISP specifications and providing a basis for discussion
>>>>>> about the details of the LISP protocols. The document will include
>>>>>> a description of the cache management and ETR synchronization
>>>>>> essential characteristics needed to ensure the correct operation
>>>>>> of the protocol.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - A description of the impacts of LISP: This document will describe
>>>>>> the problems that LISP is intended to address and the impacts that
>>>>>> employing LISP has. While the work on LISP was initiated by Internet
>>>>>> routing scaling concerns, there has also been an interest on
>>>>>> improved solutions to a number of different problems, such as
>>>>>> traffic engineering. This document should describe problem areas
>>>>>> (such as scaling or traffic engineer) where LISP is expected to have
>>>>>> a positive effect, as well as any tradeoffs that are caused by
>>>>>> LISP's design.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From: [email protected]
>>>>>>> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06.txt
>>>>>>> Date: 29 Sep 2014 13:21:29 GMT+2
>>>>>>> To: "Damien Saucez" <[email protected]>, "Luigi Iannone" 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]>, Florin Coras <[email protected]>, 
>>>>>>> Damien Saucez <[email protected]>, Luigi Iannone 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]>, "Florin Coras" 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]>, Albert Cabellos <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06.txt
>>>>>>> has been successfully submitted by Damien Saucez and posted to the
>>>>>>> IETF repository.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Name:        draft-saucez-lisp-impact
>>>>>>> Revision:    06
>>>>>>> Title:        LISP Impact
>>>>>>> Document date:    2014-09-29
>>>>>>> Group:        Individual Submission
>>>>>>> Pages:        15
>>>>>>> URL:            
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06.txt
>>>>>>> Status:         
>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saucez-lisp-impact/
>>>>>>> Htmlized:       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06
>>>>>>> Diff:           
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-saucez-lisp-impact-06
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>> The Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) aims at improving
>>>>>>> the Internet scalability properties leveraging on three simple
>>>>>>> principles: address role separation, encapsulation, and mapping.  In
>>>>>>> this document, based on implementation, deployment, and theoretical
>>>>>>> studies, we discuss the impact that deployment of LISP can have on
>>>>>>> both the Internet in general and for the end-users in particular.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
>>>>>>> submission
>>>>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The IETF Secretariat
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> lisp mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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