Short version:   Why does anyone think that LISP implements the
                 the Locator / Identity Separation naming model?

                 "Locator / Identity Separation" doesn't describe
                 anything but this naming model.

                 Loc/ID Separation is a complete change to the
                 way hosts communicate, but LISP and other CES
                 architectures support hosts communicating with
                 today's IPv4/6 naming model in which the roles
                 of Identifier and Locator are both performed
                 by the one IP address.

                 An EID address is not an Identifier and an RLOC
                 address is not a Locator.  Both kinds of address
                 are like any IP address - they play the roles of
                 both Identifier and Locator.  ITRs use a different
                 algorithm for EID destination addresses.  All
                 other routers and all hosts make no distinction
                 between EID and RLOC addresses.

Hi Noel,

In the "Re: [rrg] Why won't supporters of Loc/ID Separation (CEE)
argue their case?" you wrote:

>> (LISP is misnamed - it does not involve Loc/ID Separation.)
> Yes, it just has a mapping database to waste cycles and increase
> complexity!
> Whatever.

The LISP mapping system accepts an "edge" (EID) address and returns
the "core" (RLOC) address of the one or more ETRs which can deliver
packets to the destination network.  This is not a question of
Identifiers and Locators - it is "edge" addresses and "core" addresses.

Please take a look at

   CES & CEE are completely different (graphs)

   Today's "IP addr. = ID = Loc" naming model should be retained

LISP is a Core-Edge Separation architecture.  It creates a separate
subset of global unicast address space ("edge" space, AKA "EID"
space) which can scalably be used by end-user networks for
portability, multihoming and inbound TE.  The remainder of the global
unicast space is known as "core" (AKA "RLOC").

Whether a host is on an EID or RLOC address, its IP address still
functions both as this host's Identifier and as the routing Locator
which the routing system uses to get the packet to the host.  In the
case of an EID address in the destination field of a packet, ITRs use
a different algorithm to the usual one used by all other routers to
transport the packet towards its destination.  This is described in:

  Re: LEIDs, SPI & ordinary IP addresses as both IDs & Locs

Do you agree that all the CEE architectures implement the Loc/ID
Separation naming model?

Do you believe that LISP implements this model?  If not, then what
other sense of "Locator / Identifier Separation" do you believe LISP

  - Robin

Search engine bait:   LISP is misnamed.  The "Locator / Identifier
Separation Protocol" (LISP) is a misnomer.

rrg mailing list

Reply via email to