The text content looks good but why so much mid sentence hyphenation? Dino
> On Oct 1, 2014, at 4:53 PM, Albert Cabellos <albert.cabel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all > > This is the proposed Introduction following the comments on the list: > > This document introduces the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) > [RFC6830] architecture, its main operational mechanisms and its design > rationale. Fundamentally, LISP is built following a well-known > architectural idea: decoupling the IP address overloaded semantics. > Indeed and as pointed out by [Chiappa], currently IP addresses both > identify the topological location of a network attachment point as > well as the node's identity. However, nodes and routing have > fundamentally different requirements, routing systems require that > addresses are aggregatable and have topological meaning, while nodes > require to be identified independently of their current location. > > LISP creates two separate namespaces, EIDs (End-host IDentifiers) and > RLOCs (Routing LOCators), both are -typically, but not limited to- > syntactically identical to the current IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. EIDs > are used to uniquely identify nodes irrespective of their topological > location and are typically routed intra-domain. RLOCs are assigned > topologically to network attachment points and are typically routed > inter-domain. With LISP, the edge of the Internet -where the nodes > are connected- and the core -where inter-domain routing occurs- are > architecturally separated and interconnected by LISP-capable routers. > LISP also introduces a publicly accessible database, called the > Mapping System, to store and retrieve mappings between identity and > location. LISP-capable routers exchange packets over the Internet > core by encapsulating them to the appropriate location. > > By taking advantage of such separation between location and identity, > LISP offers Traffic Engineering, multihoming, and mobility among > others benefits. Additionally, LISP’s approach to solve the routing > scalability problem [RFC4984] is that with LISP the Internet core is > populated with RLOCs which can be quasi-static and highly > aggregatable, hence scalable [Quoitin]. > > It is important to note that this document does not specify or > complement the LISP protocol. The interested reader should refer to > the main LISP specification [RFC6830] and the complementary documents > [RFC6831],[RFC6832],[RFC6833],[RFC6834],[RFC6835], [RFC6836] for the > protocol specifications along with the LISP deployment guidelines > [RFC7215]. > > Albert > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
