On 10/14/15 1:23 AM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
Hi Fabio,

thanks for the feedback.
Are you saying that the scope of the proposed chart is too large?

No, I think the scope is very appropriate. I was just suggesting that we use those two use cases to drive the design decisions.

There are clearly many more use cases that a LISP overlay can be used for, but in my opinion those two are well understood and will help focusing the group on the protocol work that you have identified. I selected those two, and articulated them in that way, exactly because they can cover the whole scope of the outlined work.

If we include those two use cases in the charter, probably it should also mention that those are not the only ones, but are used to drive the design.


 From what I see in your mail I would say that the proposed charter covers all 
of your work items (with the exception of the programmatic northbound access to 
the mapping).

Yes. I think the SDN angle is very important for an overlay, and may drive very relevant components of the architecture. The text you posted does refers to YANG modeling, that is one component of programmability, but I would like to see this requirement more explicit, particularly for the mapping system.

I believe LISP, with the clean separation of the forwarding function provided by the mapping system, can play a key role in controller-based SDN applications. Again, it's not the only way to use LISP, but I think it's an opportunity that the WG should pick up.



Thanks,
Fabio



Or I am misunderstanding your comment?

ciao

L.


On 13 Oct 2015, at 23:53, 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

Reply via email to