> Sure, but I assume the mapping table/DB is some where else in some central > location and not on the UPF?
True. > The question is how does the UPF fetch that entry and if the interface for > that query is built on some 3GPP interface, or its internal to LISP with > no bearing on the access technology. The UPF sends IP packets. The UPF is part of the NGC core, right? So the packets from the UPF get to a map-resolver and map-server via IP. It’s pretty simple. At least it should be. Dino > > Sri > > > > On 2/5/18, 6:42 PM, "Dino Farinacci" <farina...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don’t know what you mean. If you put the xTR function on an UPF, then >> by LISP spec definition, Map-Request, Map-Reply, and Map-Register >> functionality is part of the UPF. >> >> Dino >> >>> On Feb 5, 2018, at 5:27 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) >>> <sgund...@cisco.com> wrote: >>> >>> I suspect there might be a need for a new interface. >>> >>> Assuming the LISP mapping system stays in the control plane, next to >>> SMF/AMF, and the xTR functions on the UPF, there needs to be probably a >>> new interface along the lines of the N4, for managing the LISP MAP >>> operations (Reg/Req/Reply/Notify..). But, off course if the mapping >>> system stays in the user-plane, may be there is just interworking with >>> the >>> 3GPP authentication interfaces. >>> >>> Sri >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2/5/18, 5:15 PM, "Bogineni, Kalyani" >>> <kalyani.bogin...@verizonwireless.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Dino: >>>> >>>> Please look at 3GPP TS 23.501 to understand the architecture of NGC. We >>>> tried to explain that in the White paper. >>>> TS 23.502 has the procedures for the NGC. TS 23.503 specifies the >>>> policy >>>> and charging control framework for NGC. >>>> CT4 has a technical report on protocol aspects for NGC in TR 29.891. >>>> >>>> Your draft needs to describe how it fits in the 5G architecture, right >>>> now it only addresses 4G. >>>> >>>> Kalyani >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: ila [mailto:ila-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dino Farinacci >>>> Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 7:32 PM >>>> To: Bogineni, Kalyani <kalyani.bogin...@verizonwireless.com> >>>> Cc: Tom Herbert <t...@quantonium.net>; i...@ietf.org; dmm <dmm@ietf.org>; >>>> Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <sgund...@cisco.com> >>>> Subject: Re: [Ila] [E] Re: [DMM] Fwd: New Version Notification for >>>> draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt >>>> >>>>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 5:04 AM, Bogineni, Kalyani >>>>> <kalyani.bogin...@verizonwireless.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dino: >>>>> >>>>> Can you add a section to show how this proposal would fit in 5G >>>>> architecture? >>>> >>>> Can you be more specific in what you¹d like to see in the new section? >>>> >>>> There are references throughout the draft where you see eNodeB and pGW >>>> that UPF functionality could be at the same network mode location. >>>> >>>> Dino >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ila mailing list >>>> i...@ietf.org >>>> >>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailma >>>> n_ >>>> >>>> listinfo_ila&d=DwIGaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=Id >>>> iS >>>> >>>> ODh8aDRjdCeGgd9MznLHMYKgKcs_YSwXBDiaofh47oilzaXYRYETcBynUdpT&m=zf1KfRu4n >>>> UF >>>> >>>> sUT8IJVExPygA_iAC-h4BErkY_CE2ugM&s=oLQOKLOAxuYtjVD_qWMbiQjkmP9acy6Au0X6l >>>> pS >>>> iBvg&e= >>> >> > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
