Hi Dino,
the draft says, right in the abstract, that: "This extension is
intended to be used in some SDN deployments that use LISP as a
southbound protocol with (P)ITRs that are compliant with [RFC6830
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6830>]." I don't think we need to
qualify that any further. It clearly states what the scope is without
the need to enumerate implementations (that I believe would be quite
unusual for a draft).
This is a draft marked as experimental contributed to the LISP WG as
part of the conversation on pub-sub. I honestly don't know what the WG
will decide to do with it. I observe that the authors are not proposing
this draft as a WG item.
If the WG will ever decide to have a WG draft on pub-sub, I hope there
will be a section talking about interoperability with xTRs that are
RFC6830 compliant. This draft may, or may not, help writing that section.
Thanks,
Fabio
On 9/30/15 1:36 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Hi Dino,
thanks for your replay.
The main goal of this draft is to document what is implemented in ODL
(https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_Lisp_Flow_Mapping:Architecture),
with the hope that comments and feedback will help us improve that solution,
and facilitate interoperability.
The draft does not say that.
If that is the goal to document ODL behavior, can you please state that in the
document. And indicate that this solution may not be a permanent one but a
draft that simply documents an implementation behavior?
The driving requirement (as stated upfront in the abstract) is interoperability
with EXISTING xTRs, as specified in RFC 6830.
But more to the point for SDN environments, where with SDN, there are multiple
ways to skin a cat, where ODL is one such way of doing SDN.
Thanks,
Dino
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
