HI Albert, thanks for the feedback.
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 10:12, Albert Cabellos <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Luigi, Joel > > Thanks for the draft, I think it describes very relevant action items for > LISP. > :-) > I would also suggest exploring a flexible data-modeling language as a > complement to LCAF for LISP control. LCAF is too rigid and it lacks of > design guidelines Having design guidelines does not forcedly mean having a programmatic language approach. Right? In your opinion could well defined guidelines (not language) be added to the current LCAF document? > to define new ones. A flexible language with a clear > syntax would ease deployment of new use-cases both at the data and > control plane. How much relevant and with what priority is this for the WG? ( _NOTE_ this question is for the whole WG not just for Albert…) > Maybe this could be done as experimental (not > standard). _if_ the WG decides to take on this work it would very reasonable to go for experimental. ciao L. > > Albert > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Fabio Maino <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Joel, Luigi, >> thanks for taking a stab at this one. >> >> I think it covers the relevant aspects that I would like to see the WG to >> focus on. >> >> As discussed in the use case thread, I would suggest that the draft should >> mention a very small set of use cases that we can use to drive the design >> decisions. I think that we can possibly cover all of the protocol aspects >> you describe if we take the following two use cases: >> 1) LISP-based programmable L2/L3 VPNs with extensions to support the >> following services: >> - encryption >> - programmatic northbound access to the mapping and to xTR configuration >> - SFC/NFV >> - VPN termination on mobile nodes >> 2) LISP-based programmable L2/L3 VPNs for DC applications >> >> I think these two will give a good scope to the WG work and, without >> resorting to more exotic use cases, reinforce the focus on the use of LISP >> as an overlay technology. >> >> Thanks, >> Fabio >> >> >> >> >> On 10/13/15 1:30 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote: >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> in the past weeks (and months) there was a fruitful discussion that took >>> place on the mailing list (and also in Prague) concerning >>> the new charter to be adopted by our WG. Thanks for this effort. >>> >>> Beside this discussion we had proposals from WG members as well as >>> discussion with our AD about what is practical and reasonable. >>> Hereafter you can find the result: a draft of the new proposed charter. >>> >>> This does not mean that discussion is over, rather that we reached a first >>> consistent milestone for further discussion. >>> Discussion ideally culminating in our meeting in Japan. >>> >>> So please have look and send your thoughts and feedback to the mailing list. >>> >>> Joel and Luigi >>> >>> %—————————————————————————————————————————————————% >>> The LISP WG has completed the first set of Experimental RFCs >>> describing the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP supports >>> a routing architecture which decouples the routing locators and >>> identifiers, thus allowing for efficient aggregation of the routing locator >>> space and providing persistent identifiers in the identifier space. >>> LISP requires no changes to end-systems or to routers that do not >>> directly participate in the LISP deployment. LISP aims for an >>> incrementally deployable protocol. The scope of the LISP >>> technology is recognized to range from programmable overlays, >>> at Layer 2 as well as at Layer 3, including NAT traversal, and >>> supporting mobility as a general feature, independently of whether >>> it is a mobile user or a migrating VM, hence being applicable in both >>> Data Centers and public Internet environments. >>> >>> The LISP WG is chartered to continue work on the LISP base protocol >>> with the main objective to develop a standard solution based on the >>> completed Experimental RFCs and the experience gained from early >>> deployments. >>> This work will include reviewing the existing set of Experimental RFCs >>> and doing the necessary enhancements to support a base set of >>> standards track RFCs. The group will review the current set of Working >>> Group documents to identify potential standards-track documents and >>> do the necessary enhancements to support standards-track. It is >>> recognized that some of the work will continue on the experimental track, >>> though the group is encouraged to move the documents to standards >>> track in support of network use, whereas the work previously was >>> scoped to research studies. >>> >>> Beside this main focus, the LISP WG may work on the following items: >>> >>> • NAT-Traversal >>> • Mobility >>> • Data-Plane Encryption >>> • Multicast: Support for overlay multicast by means of replication >>> as well as interfacing with existing underlay multicast support. >>> • YANG Data models for management of LISP. >>> • Multi-protocol support: Specifying the required extensions to >>> support >>> multi-protocol encapsulation (e.g., L2 or NSH – Network Service >>> Headers). Rather than developing new encapsulations, the work will >>> aim at using existing well-established encapsulations or emerging >>> from other Working Groups such as NVO3 and SFC. >>> • Alternative Mapping System Design: When extending LISP to support >>> new protocols,it may be also necessary to develop the related >>> mapping >>> function extensions to operate LISP map-assisted networks (which >>> might include Hierarchical Pull, Publish/Subscribe, or Push models >>> and related security extensions). >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
