Re: [RRG] Long term clean-slate only for the RRG?

[Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>]

> Dino,
>
> Like I said, it has been a while since I looked at it. I'd have to  
> go through it again and refresh my memory. Perhaps I can find some  
> time in the near future to do that, right now, I've unfortunately  
> got too much else happening.
>
>         jak

This kinda reinforces your point about how a small group of people  
that are focused solely on this problem is really the most efficient  
way to get a solution to get traction.

The sort of management issues I see what LISP are:

1) There is a new namespace.
2) There is encapsulation.
3) There is a mapping database.

As for 1), it is no different than managing 2 address spaces, each in  
different VRFs. So network operators have experience with this. We  
aren't introducing anything monumentally new.

As for 2), we understand tunneling. We have seen it in so many forms  
over the last decade and a half. We know why it's good and what the  
disadvantages are. So there are no surprises here. Nothing  
monumentally new.

As for 3), the mapping database is something that has to scale on a  
grander scale that what we've seen with other mapping or caching  
databases. Some exiting ones to note are ARP, DNS, an NAT. For ARP,  
the problem is constrained to link-local usage but I have seen some  
layer-2 networks with 10^5 MACs on it. As for DNS, I think it works  
remarkably well for the grand scale it is being used for. In fact, I  
just saw an article about Paul Mock and the *25th anniversary* of DNS.  
So we can borrow some of the *simple* ideas from DNS. As for NAT, we  
have seen large NAT tables (in the places where people are connecting  
sites and SPs together). NAT has a major OpEx hit but again the  
mapping database proposals especially LISP-ALT is not really  
introducing anything monumentally new. It's just BGP over tunnels and  
you send Map-Request and return Map-Replies over this topology.

I was able to nutshell LISP-ALT in one sentence.

So I really feel that the LISP architecture is pretty much taking well- 
known technology from many places and putting it into an architecture  
so we can incrementally deploy a solution. So I think the risk of  
deploying LISP is relatively low.

Please don't get me wrong or take this the wrong way. I am not posting  
this message to do "LISP marketing", I am trying to be practical. And  
as Noel has stated, the network, as it is deployed today is messy (or  
as Peter Lothberg would say "full of spaghetti"), which calls for some  
hard decisions to be made.

Dino


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg