nanog mailing list archives
Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF)
From: Jeff Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 03:25:45 -0400
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
I fear that at its worst and most successful, LISP ensures ipv4 is the backbone transport media to the detriment of ipv6 and at its best, it is a distraction for folks that need to be making ipv6 work, for real.i suspect that a number of lisp proponents are of that mind. i do not think it does a service to the internet.
My understanding is that transport over v6 is indeed on everyone's mind and absolutely is a goal for all the LISP people. So on this particular point, your concern is being addressed. What LISP has not done is actually improve the root problem of scaling up the number of multi-homed networks or locators. The cache scheme works if you imagine an ideal Internet where there is no DoS, but otherwise, it does not work. All the same problems of flow-cache routing still exist and LISP actually makes them worse in some cases, not better. It also adds huge complexity and risk but what value it adds (outside of VPN-over-Internet) is questionable at best. -- Jeff S Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz> Sr Network Operator / Innovative Network Concepts
Current thread:
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?), (continued)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Jeff Wheeler (Jul 11)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Owen DeLong (Jul 11)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Benson Schliesser (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) William Herrin (Jul 11)
- RE: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Ronald Bonica (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Leo Bicknell (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Cameron Byrne (Jul 12)
- in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Randy Bush (Jul 12)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Cameron Byrne (Jul 12)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Randy Bush (Jul 12)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Jeff Wheeler (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Randy Bush (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Scott Brim (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Cameron Byrne (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) steve ulrich (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Fred Baker (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Scott Brim (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Fred Baker (Jul 13)
- RE: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Ronald Bonica (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Fred Baker (Jul 13)
- Re: in defense of lisp (was: Anybody can participate in the IETF) Dobbins, Roland (Jul 13)