With regard to the LISP Reliable Transport, I think there are two
separate questions, with very different answers.
Q1: Should the draft describe how to use QUIC as one of the reliable
transports after initial communication? That is up to the authors and
working group. If someone wants to do the work to specify it, and
coordinate with the QUIC folks to make sure we get it right, then I see
no reason we can't do so. It would however delay the work.
Q2: Should the base LISP mechanism be changed to use QUIC instead of
UDP? While a fair quesiton in general, that is out of scope for this
draft. And given that we have a pile of LISP documents about the UDP
based mechanism in the hands of the RFC Editor, I would really like to
see us finish our work before we decide to change its underpinnings.
I am sure it could be done. Once we have completed getting the PS
documents out, if someone wanted to write a draft on how to replace the
base UDP with QUIC, go through all of the protocol implications, include
a comparison of state and time issues so as to make an evaluation
practical, and then ask the WG to consider it, well, it would be up to
the WG. But it would need a lot more than "how about we replace UDP
with QUIC?"
Yours,
Joel
On 4/22/2022 2:11 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Hi Dino,
Before I hit sent I did search the draft and did not find any match on
QUIC :(
But to your question - yes. I see no reason why LISP control plane
could not be running over QUIC.
Best,
R.
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 7:59 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]>
wrote:
The draft indicates QUIC can be used as a reliable transport. But
are you saying QUIC should be used for all LISP messages?
Dino
> On Apr 22, 2022, at 6:35 AM, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> May I ask for reasons not to use QUIC instead of home made UDP
based transport followed by TCP ?
>
> Many thx,
> Robert
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:42 AM Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote:
> All,
>
> During the last LISP WG meeting in Vienna/Meetecho the authors
of the draft:
>
> LISP Map Server Reliable Transport
>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kouvelas-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport/
>
> Asked for adoption as WG document.
> Call for adoption during the meeting showed clear consensus.
> This email is the usual procedure to confirm the consensus on
the mailing list.
>
> If anybody has concerns about adopting this document please
state so on the mailing list before May 5th 2022.
> Please also argument the technical reason why you have concerns.
>
> Ciao
>
> Luigi & Joel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
