[RRG] Not separate namespaces: Loc-ID-separation, map-encap etc.

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Dino,

In a recent message in the "Long term clean-slate only for the RRG?"
thread, you wrote, in part:

> 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.

Map-encap (map and encapsulate) schemes including LISP, APT, Ivip
and TRRP are often referred to as "Loc-ID-Split" or "Locator -
Identifier Separation" schemes or similar.

I think that "Split" and "separate" on their own are valid terms for
the concept of having a subset of the IPv4/6 addresses managed by
the map-encap scheme as Identifier space ("EID" - Endpoint
IDentifier in LISP).

But I am sure there is no new namespace in LISP or any other
map-encap system.

In a map-encap system, some IP addresses refer to address space
which is managed conventionally by BGP.  LISP terminology for this
is "RLOC" space.  ETRs and ITRs need to have RLOC addresses.

Other IP addresses are within the subset of the address space which
ITRs and ETRs manage.  These are "EID prefixes" in LISP, or
"micronets" in Ivip.

However, "RLOC" and "EID" are not separate namespaces.

If they were separate namespaces, then the address 12.34.56.78 would
mean one thing when used in the RLOC namespace and another thing
entirely when used in the the EID space.

But that is not the case.  12.34.56.78 may be an EID address or an
RLOC address - but it can't be both.

I believe that all public IPv4 addresses - those outside 10.0.0.0/8,
172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16 and 127.0.0.0/8 - are in the one
namespace, with or without LISP etc.

I wrote more about this on 19 March:

  Re: [RRG] On "jack-down" models - independent namespaces
  http://psg.com/lists/rrg/2008/msg00856.html


   - Robin


--
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