Re: [RAM] Comment on draft-farinacci-lisp-00.txt (LISP)

[jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)]

    > From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov at juniper.net>

    > My question was in the context of LISP 1.5.

Dino just mentioned how LISP 1 is a "phase 0 prototype effort", and I suspect
the same is true, in some ways, of many of the lower numbered LISP variants.
My sense is that the one that gets deployed in large-scale operational
service is likely to be LISP 4 or 5 (or more), i.e. one that's not yet
defined.

My guess is that the architectural commonality between LISP 1/1.5/etc and the
eventual deployed stuff is likely to be:

- Hosts and local routers don't need to be modified
- The existing internetwork layer is "jacked up" to become mostly an
	end-end host naming layer
- End-end names are mapped into new locators as they cross the boundary

I think LISP is the first detailed proposal in the last half-decade or so to
propose operating in this particular architectural quadrant (which may well be
the only feasible one to operate in), and I suspect that's why it's getting a
lot of attention. However, the final product may look quite different from the
initial prototypes we have on paper now.

The current discussion seems to be a somewhat unfocussed mix of "can we
operate in this quadrant at all", and details of particular variants, trying
to sort of which particular approach (within the boundary lines above) works;
most of the current discussion is, of course, looking at how to do the
mapping, which is appropriate, because that's probably the hardest part.

	Noel

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM at iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram