Joel, The idea we have in mind for this generic LCAF is intradomain deployments where the same entity (or several entities with some sort of agreement) has control over both MS/MR and xTR/RTR devices. In that scenario the exact usage of the generic encoding will be arrange in advance.
The value we see on the generic LCAF is that it allows the deployment of new applications without need to modify the mapping system. If an entity has a fresh idea involving LISP, and it has LISP devices that support a generic LCAF encoding, it can deploy its idea immediately. This a way to encourage the experimentation and innovation with LISP. For the scenario you propose (no beforehand agreement between entities), we can introduce some kind of "sub-type" to specify the exact purpose of the generic LCAF. This "sub-type" can be encoded as the very first field on the generic part. Let me know what you think. Alberto On 2 September 2013 19:32, Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> wrote: > With regard to the generic LCAF, it seems that each usage would have to > specify what it was actually going to use it for, but this would not be > captured in the mapping system. > This would seem to lead to the situation where one entity is looking > things up with one purpose in mind, but finds mapping for some other > purpose, which it can not support. > > Yours, > Joel > > > On 9/2/13 1:21 PM, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal wrote: > >> Dear Dino, all, >> >> Here are some ideas we have for new types of LCAFs. >> >> First, we will like to see a 5-tuple LCAF to allow mapping lookups based >> on flows. In the attached TXT there is a proposed format. It allows to >> perform exact match flow lookups, as well as best match lookups using >> port range and prefix mask length. The proposed 5-tuple LCAF is based on >> current types 4 and 12, and can be a new type itself, or be merged with >> those types. >> >> Second, we find interesting to have a generic (self-defined) LCAF type. >> A format like that will allow complex and/or experimental LISP >> applications. We aim for a binary JSON-like format. This LCAF type >> almost needs no definition, just a new LCAF type number and an agreement >> on the binary specification to use. Personally, I like the Universal >> Binary JSON Specification (http://ubjson.org/). >> >> I would like to know what the WG thinks of these proposals. >> >> Thanks, >> Alberto >> >> >> On 2 September 2013 18:08, Dino Farinacci <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I have some updates that I will post to the list but if anyone >> thinks there are pending changes and you have told or requested of >> me to add text, can you please repost in this list so the entire >> working group can see the request and be part of the discussion. >> >> Thanks, >> Dino >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From:* IETF Secretariat >> <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.**org<[email protected]> >>> >>> <mailto:ietf-secretariat-**[email protected]<[email protected]> >>> >> >>> *Date:* September 2, 2013 at 4:42:06 AM PDT >>> *To:* "Dino Farinacci" <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "David Meyer" <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "Job Snijders" <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Cc:* "Terry Manderson" <[email protected] >>> <mailto:terry.manderson@icann.**org <[email protected]>>>, >>> "Joel M. Halpern" >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> *Subject:* *Expiration impending: <draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt>* >>> >>> >>> The following draft will expire soon: >>> >>> Name: draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf >>> Title: LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) >>> State: I-D Exists >>> Expires: 2013-09-11 (in 1 week, 1 day) >>> >>> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> lisp mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/lisp<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp> >> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> lisp mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/lisp<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp> >> >>
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
