Hi All, Thanks from the reply so far.
What I gather is that there is interest in extending the LISP overlay model to support other data-planes. What remain unclear is what those data-planes should be. Note that it is impossible to cover all existing data-planes. Would be helpful if the group gives a clearer direction by suggesting a set encaps to add support for. (this include as well the willingness to directly contribute to the work) ciao L. > On 10 Aug 2015, at 00:05, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > LISP provides a rather complete and powerful control-plane, where > by means of LCAF, possibly any existing namespace can be mapped > on each other. > However, the data-plane is not as flexible. The current specifications > allow only IPv4 over IPv6 and vice versa. > > In order to create what Sharon Barakai defined “map assisted overlays” > more work is needed. > > In this context the WG should also decide whether just an extended/enhanced > data-plane is sufficient/needed. Or should the scope be slightly larger and > allow as well to support multiple headers type? > Such header are not necessarily defined by the LISP WG > (e.g. VXLAN-GPE, GENEVE, GUE, etc.) > > Would the WG be interested in working in extending the LISP overlay model > in order to provide data-plane support for what the control plane already > allows? > And what should be the scope? > > Joel & Luigi > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
