Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Hi Dino, > -Original Message- > From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:farina...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 4:35 PM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) ; i...@ietf.org; dmm > > Subject: Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for > draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt > > > AERO uses IPv6 Neighbor Discovery as its control-plane. Surely that is the > > most mature? > > Yes when used in a layer-2 subnet. Uses in a wider scope it has NHRP > properties. The AERO tunnel is an NBMA link the same as for any link, and uses RFC4861 neighbor discovery messaging. All nodes on the link can communicate as single-hop neighbors. > If you remember we had something called LISP-EMACS (thanks John Curran) which > we “ARPed a Map-Request over a layer 3 multicast > fabric” to resolve mappings. I don't recall that, but AERO got its start with ISATAP back in Y2K . Like AERO, ISATAP uses IPv6 ND messaging over tunnels. Thanks - Fred > Dino ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
> AERO uses IPv6 Neighbor Discovery as its control-plane. Surely that is the > most mature? Yes when used in a layer-2 subnet. Uses in a wider scope it has NHRP properties. If you remember we had something called LISP-EMACS (thanks John Curran) which we “ARPed a Map-Request over a layer 3 multicast fabric” to resolve mappings. Dino ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Hi Dino, > -Original Message- > From: dmm [mailto:dmm-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dino Farinacci > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 3:38 PM > To: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) > Cc: i...@ietf.org; dmm > Subject: Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for > draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt > > One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. ILA > has a recent proposal for its control-plane. AERO uses IPv6 Neighbor Discovery as its control-plane. Surely that is the most mature? Thanks - Fred > Dino > > > On Feb 1, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) > > wrote: > > > > Thank you Dino. > > > > WG - Same comments for this draft. LISP is another LOC-ID proposal, with > > many common attributes (if I may say, like two twins) shared with ILA; > > some differences in how the Locator (COA) and identifier (HOA) spaces are > > defined/used/managed, and with one key difference of tunneling vs > > translation. Please review. > > > > > > Regards > > Sri > > > > On 2/1/18, 2:59 PM, "Dino Farinacci" wrote: > > > >>> ILA is one of the proposals on the table. This is not an adoption call > >>> at > >>> this time, but asking the WG to review and open up some discussions that > >>> will help IETF understand the problem/solutions, and pick the right > >>> solution(s) for this problem statement. If there is interest and if the > >>> work is in scope for the group, we will issue an adoption call at some > >>> point in future. Please review. > >> > >> I just got on the dmm list. Here is another proposal: > >> > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network/ > >> > >> Dino > >> > > > > ___ > dmm mailing list > dmm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Thank you Fred. There is a reason for mobile architectures shifting towards CP-UP split architecture (Ref: DMM WG documents + 3GPP CUPS), and the stated goal of further simplification in the mobile user plane (Reference: 3GPP CT4 Study item and 3GPP Liaison statement to DMM). Now, it will be good if we can explain how each of these protocols (ILA, LISP, AERO ..) address those key objectives around mobile user-plane optimization, else there is no reason for the WG to consider that specific protocol option. So, please do include this text in the I-D, and/or explain to the WG on how its addressing these issues. WG - Please review AERO specs, along with the other proposals. Sri On 2/2/18, 7:40 AM, "Templin, Fred L" wrote: >Hi, please add AERO to the list: > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-aerolink/ > >AERO does IPv6 ND over tunnels, and supports mobility via dynamic >neighbor cache updates the same as any IPv6 link. Use cases include >(but are not limited to): > >- Enterprise mobile devices (cellphones, tablets, etc. as mobile networks) >- civil aviation networks (airplanes as mobile networks) >- Unmanned Air Systems (drones as mobile networks) > >AERO has been discussed in this forum several years back, and has >continued to mature since that time. Maybe now is the time to start >talking about it again. > >Thanks - Fred > ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Hi, please add AERO to the list: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-aerolink/ AERO does IPv6 ND over tunnels, and supports mobility via dynamic neighbor cache updates the same as any IPv6 link. Use cases include (but are not limited to): - Enterprise mobile devices (cellphones, tablets, etc. as mobile networks) - civil aviation networks (airplanes as mobile networks) - Unmanned Air Systems (drones as mobile networks) AERO has been discussed in this forum several years back, and has continued to mature since that time. Maybe now is the time to start talking about it again. Thanks - Fred ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Absolutely! A programmable data plane what FPC interface is offering, keeps the CUPS objectives. Sri On 2/1/18, 5:07 PM, "ila on behalf of Marco Liebsch" wrote: >I think we should rather relax the dependency between control and data >plane. If we treat the data plane as nodes which enforce policies (encap, >recap, re-write, etc), any c plane may suit and enforce suitable policies >in the selected data plane nodes, e.g. by utilizing the DMM group’s FPC >models. Any solution that binds the data plane to a particular control >plane may constrain its deployment, no? > >marco > > > >On 2. Feb 2018, at 01:39, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) >wrote: > >>> One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. >>> ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. >> >> Mobility architectures started with a unified CP/UP approach, then the >> industry thought its a great idea to move the Control-plane out, and >> reduce the state in the User-plane, and eliminate tunnels. Now, we want >>to >> eliminate the tunnels, but we need a new control protocol to manage the >> binding tables, and manage the complex cache states. Wondering, what¹s >> wrong with this picture? What de we name this new CUPS architecture? >> >> >> Sri >> >> >> (with no chair hat) >> >> >> ___ >> dmm mailing list >> dmm@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > >___ >ila mailing list >i...@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ila ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Tom, Last I remember, we gave one “generic” and an access agnostic protocol in the form MIPv6/PMIPv6, they never got it and never cared. But, if you can sell it to 3GPP, this new control-plane that goes into user-plane, I am with you. :-) Sri On 2/1/18, 4:57 PM, "Tom Herbert" wrote: >On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) > wrote: >>> One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. >>>ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. >> >> Mobility architectures started with a unified CP/UP approach, then the >> industry thought its a great idea to move the Control-plane out, and >> reduce the state in the User-plane, and eliminate tunnels. Now, we want >>to >> eliminate the tunnels, but we need a new control protocol to manage the >> binding tables, and manage the complex cache states. Wondering, what¹s >> wrong with this picture? What de we name this new CUPS architecture? >> >Sri, > >Bear in mind that "industry" has different meanings depending on the >context. For ILA, and probably for LISP, the intent is to build a >generic protocol that can be used across variety of use cases in the >networking industry which hasn't uniformly adopted CUPS. It's pretty >obvious that we'd want to leverage a single data plane control plane >for these (isn't that the point of generic protocols :-) ). The CUPS >actually architecture helps a lot here by creating a clean well >abstracted interface that should make it straightforward to adapt an >ILA control plane. I think our architecture where we define ILA as an >NF reflects that. > >Tom > >> >> Sri >> >> >> (with no chair hat) >> >> ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
I think we should rather relax the dependency between control and data plane. If we treat the data plane as nodes which enforce policies (encap, recap, re-write, etc), any c plane may suit and enforce suitable policies in the selected data plane nodes, e.g. by utilizing the DMM group’s FPC models. Any solution that binds the data plane to a particular control plane may constrain its deployment, no? marco On 2. Feb 2018, at 01:39, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote: >> One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. >> ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. > > Mobility architectures started with a unified CP/UP approach, then the > industry thought its a great idea to move the Control-plane out, and > reduce the state in the User-plane, and eliminate tunnels. Now, we want to > eliminate the tunnels, but we need a new control protocol to manage the > binding tables, and manage the complex cache states. Wondering, what¹s > wrong with this picture? What de we name this new CUPS architecture? > > > Sri > > > (with no chair hat) > > > ___ > dmm mailing list > dmm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote: >> One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. >>ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. > > Mobility architectures started with a unified CP/UP approach, then the > industry thought its a great idea to move the Control-plane out, and > reduce the state in the User-plane, and eliminate tunnels. Now, we want to > eliminate the tunnels, but we need a new control protocol to manage the > binding tables, and manage the complex cache states. Wondering, what¹s > wrong with this picture? What de we name this new CUPS architecture? > Sri, Bear in mind that "industry" has different meanings depending on the context. For ILA, and probably for LISP, the intent is to build a generic protocol that can be used across variety of use cases in the networking industry which hasn't uniformly adopted CUPS. It's pretty obvious that we'd want to leverage a single data plane control plane for these (isn't that the point of generic protocols :-) ). The CUPS actually architecture helps a lot here by creating a clean well abstracted interface that should make it straightforward to adapt an ILA control plane. I think our architecture where we define ILA as an NF reflects that. Tom > > Sri > > > (with no chair hat) > > ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
> One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. >ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. Mobility architectures started with a unified CP/UP approach, then the industry thought its a great idea to move the Control-plane out, and reduce the state in the User-plane, and eliminate tunnels. Now, we want to eliminate the tunnels, but we need a new control protocol to manage the binding tables, and manage the complex cache states. Wondering, what¹s wrong with this picture? What de we name this new CUPS architecture? Sri (with no chair hat) ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
One thing to add. LISP has a more mature control-plane mapping system. ILA has a recent proposal for its control-plane. Dino > On Feb 1, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) > wrote: > > Thank you Dino. > > WG - Same comments for this draft. LISP is another LOC-ID proposal, with > many common attributes (if I may say, like two twins) shared with ILA; > some differences in how the Locator (COA) and identifier (HOA) spaces are > defined/used/managed, and with one key difference of tunneling vs > translation. Please review. > > > Regards > Sri > > On 2/1/18, 2:59 PM, "Dino Farinacci" wrote: > >>> ILA is one of the proposals on the table. This is not an adoption call >>> at >>> this time, but asking the WG to review and open up some discussions that >>> will help IETF understand the problem/solutions, and pick the right >>> solution(s) for this problem statement. If there is interest and if the >>> work is in scope for the group, we will issue an adoption call at some >>> point in future. Please review. >> >> I just got on the dmm list. Here is another proposal: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network/ >> >> Dino >> > ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Thank you Dino. WG - Same comments for this draft. LISP is another LOC-ID proposal, with many common attributes (if I may say, like two twins) shared with ILA; some differences in how the Locator (COA) and identifier (HOA) spaces are defined/used/managed, and with one key difference of tunneling vs translation. Please review. Regards Sri On 2/1/18, 2:59 PM, "Dino Farinacci" wrote: >> ILA is one of the proposals on the table. This is not an adoption call >>at >> this time, but asking the WG to review and open up some discussions that >> will help IETF understand the problem/solutions, and pick the right >> solution(s) for this problem statement. If there is interest and if the >> work is in scope for the group, we will issue an adoption call at some >> point in future. Please review. > >I just got on the dmm list. Here is another proposal: > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network/ > >Dino > ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
> ILA is one of the proposals on the table. This is not an adoption call at > this time, but asking the WG to review and open up some discussions that > will help IETF understand the problem/solutions, and pick the right > solution(s) for this problem statement. If there is interest and if the > work is in scope for the group, we will issue an adoption call at some > point in future. Please review. I just got on the dmm list. Here is another proposal: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network/ Dino ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
Re: [DMM] [Ila] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt
Thank you Tom and Kalyani for your submission. WG - During the adoption of draft-matsushima-spring-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane, we did say that we will consider alternative approaches for the problem statement around mobile user-plane optimization, and that we will not limit to SRv6 as the only option. ILA is one of the proposals on the table. This is not an adoption call at this time, but asking the WG to review and open up some discussions that will help IETF understand the problem/solutions, and pick the right solution(s) for this problem statement. If there is interest and if the work is in scope for the group, we will issue an adoption call at some point in future. Please review. Thanks! Dapeng & Sri On 2/1/18, 1:27 PM, "ila on behalf of Tom Herbert" wrote: >Hello, > >We posted this draft that describe using ILA for the mobile network >use case, and some specifics about using ILA in 5G. > >We like like to request that the dmm WG consider ILA as a candidate >protocol for the 3GPP "Study on User Plane Protocol in 5GC". > >Comments are appreciated! > >Thank you, >Tom > >-- Forwarded message -- >From: >Date: Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:09 AM >Subject: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt >To: Tom Herbert , Kalyani Bogineni > > > > >A new version of I-D, draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt >has been successfully submitted by Tom Herbert and posted to the >IETF repository. > >Name: draft-herbert-ila-mobile >Revision: 00 >Title: Identifier Locator Addressing for Mobile User-Plane >Document date: 2018-02-01 >Group: Individual Submission >Pages: 22 >URL: >https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00.txt >Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-herbert-ila-mobile/ >Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00 >Htmlized: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-herbert-ila-mobile-00 > > >Abstract: > This document discusses the applicability of Identifier Locator > Addressing (ILA) to the user-plane of mobile networks. ILA allows a > means to implement network overlays without the overhead, > complexities, or anchor points associated with encapsulation. This > solution facilitates highly efficient packet forwarding and provides > low latency and scalability in mobile networks. ILA can be used in > conjunction with techniques such as network slices and Network > Function Virtualization to achieve optimal service based forwarding. > > > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >submission >until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > >The IETF Secretariat > >___ >ila mailing list >i...@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ila ___ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
