[rrg] [Int-area] Please respond: Questions from the IESG as to whether a WG forming BOF is necessary for LISP

[David Meyer]

	Yakov,

> In answering this question we need to keep in mind that such
> techniques as (a) caching routing and forwarding information, (b)
> use of separate mapping system for Loc/ID mapping, (c) relying on
> probing for determining path feasibility are essential/fundamental
> to LISP.

	(c) is clearly not fundemental to LISP. 

	What is fundemental (IMO) to any Loc/ID split
	architecture is what have what we have termed the Locator
	Path Liveness problem. How that problem is solved is a
	matter for each architecture to consider. 

	In particular, probing is a solution to the Locator Path
	Liveness problem, but as we know from shim6 (etc), the
	complexity of that isn't pretty. But then either is the
	O(n!) complexity of BGP path hunting. In any event, the
	space of potential solutions for map-and-encap schemes
	such as LISP (or eFIT, Ivip, etc) haven't been throughly
	explored. This is part of the reason why we think LISP
	should be EXPERIMENTAL.

> In other words, these techniques form the foundation of
> LISP.

	With respect to LISP and probing, that statement is
	incorrect. 

	Dave
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : <http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/attachments/20090122/1a441528/attachment.sig>