From nobody Mon Aug 1 13:00:20 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BC9412D10B for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:00:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gVOaQ3DvXgIf for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com (mail-wm0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 391D012DAC6 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id i5so259729496wmg.0 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:00:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=9g2K/OHENxP7MZJjrD2opFffwqPLWgPwsQYnwPmvD34=; b=heNvF3poY/7fk36Ja3jYf3yDHscF2qMi3tFZjR/Nnbf5+aQur6UlTDFE+p649g9xc5 FsXrAfxAQecCh1/dtp7Z1HQZXJk46/ItudL+KHbM1Tmyj77AGK9bYP4qsVQ7DzIA098v 264EjY6ORVNhwPWG3DHdn4qRt81uwEabfJPjtAZFLs+NJ6uqpWiAofF3u0z6v0AN8OK2 pSBrjDkOLgIvyBdqbJ4fjIPiJuii1TZAHmYlHv7i85/EDgp5abXFKzTA9Fv4X1sh3H74 gFblNXnHCpBoXKQEjmBfdg2vU2fVWYqKL0ZAXs9UA7EUx4e//uSkXwo4LbTU5MiowNAD KEIA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=9g2K/OHENxP7MZJjrD2opFffwqPLWgPwsQYnwPmvD34=; b=h3LuExZJPikDgaA107t+upmTUA+OLU7ccsvZkQHIhRwEzR54WFpTkd2o3teuwHkPvi /dFLilcZ7RsxystbfV9L/DHHYnADvRxlKAT32rauTbS/91X9jzQ9rGGOofcj1xdSzIAb CZn+TIMSTAx2siUqZCXryH4/i5cTKHkemm97XC2iZxTbzjVt86jVYCsp4VsvT6IaJWa4 GKgrUJBN1CZDTTzzx4sLZgZRbPSoAHZK4/lC8cy6FGmZDwLtStZwcABD2gjD/fJ/OHMl nzcn3M3DJuP7bgBkbt6Sn+0cXusZ7DzsZlhBJu0/86RCsXwUgtbWArQbOWvsSRjnPudk YV9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvP4Um8ZgYGYP7fSL4HvQ421ObD/cXJKWhybZcZYnpFwqGI95HdmTbM0ieQUMN0Yw== X-Received: by 10.28.48.71 with SMTP id w68mr56234397wmw.4.1470081614496; Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fatboy.homenet.telecomitalia.it (host102-117-dynamic.11-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it. [87.11.117.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q4sm32050097wjk.24.2016.08.01.13.00.12 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:00:13 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_216EF8F7-F885-4871-8D64-EF4F9BF48F86" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Luigi Iannone In-Reply-To: <9BDAB27E-54A0-430F-A907-ED6AF81A8A0E@gigix.net> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 22:00:14 +0200 Message-Id: References: <4A2C0466-F1E3-45B8-BDFC-9486DA6E9477@gigix.net> <9BDAB27E-54A0-430F-A907-ED6AF81A8A0E@gigix.net> To: LISP mailing list list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: Damien Saucez Subject: Re: [lisp] Call for adoption of draft-boucadair-lisp-type-iana-01 X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 20:00:20 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_216EF8F7-F885-4871-8D64-EF4F9BF48F86 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii HI All, the extended call for adoption for this document is now over. =46rom the replies received we can conclude that the WG does think that:=20= 1) It is worth creating a registry for LISP type messages. 2) One entry should be reserved for Experimentation purposes. Hence, there is consensus in adopting the document as WG document. The authors are invited to submit a new version of the document with = name draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt. Such document should include all comments received so far. Thanks you all =20 ciao Luigi=20 Joel =20 > On 15 Jul 2016, at 13:56, Luigi Iannone wrote: >=20 > His All, >=20 > the chairs have review the WG discussion during the adoption call. =20 >=20 > We are concerned by the low level of support. =20 > We also observed significant discussion around the experimental = allocation. =20 > So we are re-issuing and clarifying the call, to finish one week afte = rthe end of IETF 96.=20 >=20 > Please comment on two separate issues: >=20 > 1) Do you think we should create a registry for LISP message types >=20 > 2) If yes to (1), do you think that registry should include reserving = an entry for Experimentation? >=20 > As indicated in the first mail silence does not indicate support, = please respond to the call. >=20 > Yours, >=20 > Joel > Luigi >=20 > On 28 Jun 2016, at 11:37, Luigi Iannone > wrote: >=20 >> Folks, >>=20 >> The chairs received a request for the following document to be >> adopted as a WG item: >>=20 >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-lisp-type-iana-01 = >>=20 >> Here starts a 14 day call for adoption, this call will end on >> Tuesday the 12th July, 2016. >>=20 >> Please email the WG list stating whether or not you support = acceptance. >>=20 >> If you email to support the acceptance of this document as a WG item, = please >> also indicate if you are able and willing to either contribute to, or = review, (or both) the draft. >>=20 >> Sitting in silence does not indicate support, please respond = appropriately. >>=20 >>=20 >> The Chairs >> Joel & Luigi >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_216EF8F7-F885-4871-8D64-EF4F9BF48F86 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii HI All,

the= extended call for adoption for this document is now over.
=46rom the replies received we can conclude that the WG does = think that: 

1) It is worth creating a registry for LISP type = messages.

2) = One entry should be reserved for Experimentation purposes.

Hence, there is = consensus in adopting the document as WG document.
The authors are invited to submit a new version of the = document with name draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt.
Such document should include all comments received so = far.

Thanks = you all  

ciao

Luigi 
Joel


 

On = 15 Jul 2016, at 13:56, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:

His All,

the chairs have review the WG discussion during the adoption = call.  

We = are concerned by the low level of support.  
We = also observed significant discussion around the experimental = allocation.  
So we are re-issuing and = clarifying the call, to finish one week afte rthe end of IETF = 96. 

Please= comment on two separate issues:

1) Do you think we should create a registry for LISP message = types

2) If yes to = (1), do you think that registry should include reserving an entry for = Experimentation?

As indicated in the first mail silence = does not indicate support, please respond to the call.

Yours,

Joel
Luigi

On 28 Jun 2016, at 11:37, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> = wrote:

Folks,

The chairs received a = request for the following document to be
adopted as a WG = item:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-lisp-type-iana-01

Here starts a 14 day call for = adoption, this call will end on
Tuesday the 12th July, = 2016.

Please email the WG list stating = whether or not you support acceptance.

If = you email to support the acceptance of this document as a WG item, = please
also indicate if you are able and willing to either = contribute to, or review, (or both) the draft.

Sitting in silence does not indicate support, please respond = appropriately.


The Chairs
Joel = & Luigi



= --Apple-Mail=_216EF8F7-F885-4871-8D64-EF4F9BF48F86-- From nobody Thu Aug 4 13:20:22 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietf.org Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE8312D7DF; Thu, 4 Aug 2016 13:20:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.29.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160804202020.15920.30411.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 13:20:20 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: lisp@ietf.org Subject: [lisp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 20:20:21 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol of the IETF. Title : LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet Type Allocations Authors : Mohamed Boucadair Christian Jacquenet Filename : draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt Pages : 5 Date : 2016-08-01 Abstract: This document defines a registry for LISP Packet Type allocations. It also specifies a shared LISP message type for experimentation purposes. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00 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. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Aug 10 14:03:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0E512D7A9 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:03:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CTiP_X7z66ig for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B96312D7A2 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ECB6268166 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1470862988; bh=0ZITWt/z3ucfFY57pyC5zhRzRHz+naNCgTcXcW0CyWA=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=Rv2nKpiFRYNNrd9oP7f3UGAyEO2d7CM3XNs+ibwCVLVcFILVVw5z71OvlnTzMMa9U sPVNLgzfihXYdQB0yAeAL902fZtKcPVFtxN4VOnex8Ba94Y2Oo61rBN+2Mha5C/FAv Vwqg0N75fL9/LsRwKniPHtASICN9ZxpXub5G6kPE= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at maila2.tigertech.net Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AEC65245B69 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:03:07 -0700 (PDT) To: "lisp@ietf.org" From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <4bec02bf-bdc2-de95-e0d1-1cc8a64316de@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:05:20 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [lisp] Changing the title of draft-ietf-lisp-yang X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 21:03:09 -0000 Vina sent a note to the list on 25-July suggesting that the title of this draft be changed to: YANG Model for LISP There saw noticeable support, and no objections. As such, Vina, please go ahead and make that change when you next submit a revision of the draft. Yours, Joel and Luigi From nobody Wed Aug 10 15:23:23 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCFA12D893 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:23:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.768 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.768 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LI7q5WXFzc8F for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31C6C12D88E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:23:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=653; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1470867801; x=1472077401; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=faVrfnd1DQAOJ9lQ+sjewiBPhbXF3Oa/56UcRkLF/KM=; b=NPr7G4ZaVE3YBQxGXSJEvodeobX1MhcouLA1CL59EREMrtFRI7BMzEvo 5XWgdvGR1Xod+5zjtMVwdi2Z9BKC6sDi/y9OQW/VjU/VI7HhDjzJ4vVNd TFDiSgLp5VJPxTt8YXmSW318Wkxi+cOC/792L16vKjJLNE1wTHmgv+7AU I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AMAgArqKtX/5JdJa1dg0VWfAe5IoF9J?= =?us-ascii?q?IV5AoFfOBQBAQEBAQEBXSeEXwEFAQE4NBsCAQg2ECcLJQIEARKIMQ7CDQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAgEBAQEBAQEBGgWGKoRNihsFmTwBjxGBVRaEW4h9kCsBHjaDem6GUn8BA?= =?us-ascii?q?QE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,502,1464652800"; d="scan'208";a="136354367" Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Aug 2016 22:23:20 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (xch-rcd-017.cisco.com [173.37.102.27]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7AMNKpZ021236 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:23:20 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-019.cisco.com (173.37.102.29) by XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:23:19 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-019.cisco.com ([173.37.102.29]) by XCH-RCD-019.cisco.com ([173.37.102.29]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:23:19 -0500 From: "Vina Ermagan (vermagan)" To: "Joel M. Halpern" , "lisp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [lisp] Changing the title of draft-ietf-lisp-yang Thread-Index: AQHR80rnNlJDnE39lkCs9vGXOuHCm6BCo3kA Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:23:19 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4bec02bf-bdc2-de95-e0d1-1cc8a64316de@joelhalpern.com> In-Reply-To: <4bec02bf-bdc2-de95-e0d1-1cc8a64316de@joelhalpern.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.0.151221 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.19.60.138] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <8B0ADCA0674AA74CA35CF3B9E4C1CE01@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [lisp] Changing the title of draft-ietf-lisp-yang X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:23:22 -0000 HI Joel, Luigi, Thanks, I will do so in the next revision then. Best, Vina On 8/10/16, 2:05 PM, "lisp on behalf of Joel M. Halpern" wrote: >Vina sent a note to the list on 25-July suggesting that the title of >this draft be changed to: > >YANG Model for LISP > >There saw noticeable support, and no objections. >As such, Vina, please go ahead and make that change when you next submit >a revision of the draft. > >Yours, >Joel and Luigi > >_______________________________________________ >lisp mailing list >lisp@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp From nobody Wed Aug 17 13:58:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9975C12B02D for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fB_3CZzu3mQE for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x244.google.com (mail-wm0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E96012D0B6 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x244.google.com with SMTP id o80so1032555wme.0 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:subject:date:message-id:cc:to:mime-version; bh=1br1Rnrrb/dZWZ3mU2V422bQeuwQsi60btGiDuO1lWU=; b=xVyQDYm+gMH2PWQdwoF1EY3Qd9o+lSLCceAKPTCw3FimvJmVT16EXzpc8aEJkR+d4O A5nLc0bLIg4qGC9KMzcaYrnmkzyyM3JofSsu8OCHJjJs11usy4zCHENSMg7D8rx9bXGE TyUBVFqACuDxqcNqer2triyXiwGF5yMzylKiteICTjxfBaiSiPooMOlMvfPwncfCex0s 9B4xjFb1ydELoWRQKO4ILnoZGxva918O3oCdTo5Vi4r70zZ6Ggj9BWw3+ENyVw6Jku/K N92lvoSZ3kaLTtc4K3f4TNngsUGMIE+Jhh+0T25ICNehyoXq8n0J2VXil1ApVkefvzye 3kXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:date:message-id:cc:to:mime-version; bh=1br1Rnrrb/dZWZ3mU2V422bQeuwQsi60btGiDuO1lWU=; b=eKQIFd2MaMR2+tB5bBtZdzCtfDwHJkbyJEB1ez6P5QQjM25UcviHlxjTEnm3PODp5G 53gk8H7qFDbqeWqperbI64j+PTA5zXQj80k2KYfOD46iGHeA5npieuszlTU8RLm0ylP0 cKDleFSXGBjaEH0PTSUvF7TKscPN4PCczle+0fGeHuTkM3ZjlLfeAESTOWCBd5qR+n4T WnIV2I+vGa/0Tb41w1pvboUFRPfCMALjdd4Y07kQjunjLhAOaWm8PN/PKwFt43sZpHYZ ExKxXhhsjD06i7MpSRh7ATmzqGhrfjg0oDy8wDCphca+8wgVM5V9J+/cC+OhEO7drUcJ dNnA== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutSDVL1wysiDOBB049Sw7ZrtD17iWrpN38CdBGup2VAvdSPe2EnUrr6RmDdD+l3Sw== X-Received: by 10.28.126.75 with SMTP id z72mr28054556wmc.74.1471467513868; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fatboy.homenet.telecomitalia.it (host130-51-dynamic.51-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.51.51.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ko7sm139776wjc.48.2016.08.17.13.58.32 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:58:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Luigi Iannone Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_595B31FE-A28F-446D-A294-EDAAB3C99398" Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 22:58:31 +0200 Message-Id: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> To: LISP mailing list list Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:58:41 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_595B31FE-A28F-446D-A294-EDAAB3C99398 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi All, The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP = Packet=20 Type Allocations = [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for WG = Last Call.=20 This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, = 2016. Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it = is ready for handing to the AD. If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what = it would take to address your concerns. Thanks Luigi & Joel= --Apple-Mail=_595B31FE-A28F-446D-A294-EDAAB3C99398 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Hi All,

The authors of the LISP Experimental = Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet 
Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] = asked for WG Last Call. 

This email starts the usual two weeks = WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2016.

Please review this WG = document and let the WG know if you agree that it is ready for handing = to the AD.
If you have objections, please = state your reasons why, and explain what it would take to address your = concerns.

Thanks

Luigi & = Joel
= --Apple-Mail=_595B31FE-A28F-446D-A294-EDAAB3C99398-- From nobody Thu Aug 18 00:40:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C329212D74F; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:39:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.846 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.846 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dtk7yhn4NrKW; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-nor35.orange.com [80.12.70.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B461712B011; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from opfednr00.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.64]) by opfednr27.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 1A319A03B4; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:39:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.59]) by opfednr00.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id DCD851A0064; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:39:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::ec23:902:c31f:731c%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:39:55 +0200 From: To: Luigi Iannone , LISP mailing list list Thread-Topic: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt Thread-Index: AQHR+MolfA+3m9udvE2rGdH6ksC2G6BOVYRw Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:39:55 +0000 Message-ID: <4007_1471505996_57B5664B_4007_4621_1_88132E969123D14D9BD844E1CD516EDE130CF1A2@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> References: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> In-Reply-To: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_88132E969123D14D9BD844E1CD516EDE130CF1A2OPEXCLILMA3corp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "lisp-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:40:00 -0000 --_000_88132E969123D14D9BD844E1CD516EDE130CF1A2OPEXCLILMA3corp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable WG, As one of the authors of draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana, I believe the document = is ready to move forward. Cheers, Christian. De : lisp [mailto:lisp-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Luigi Iannone Envoy=E9 : mercredi 17 ao=FBt 2016 22:59 =C0 : LISP mailing list list Cc : lisp-chairs@ietf.org Objet : [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt Hi All, The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00]= asked for WG Last Call. This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 201= 6. Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is = ready for handing to the AD. If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what it = would take to address your concerns. Thanks Luigi & Joel ___________________________________________________________________________= ______________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confiden= tielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu= ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages el= ectroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou = falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged inf= ormation that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and dele= te this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been = modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. --_000_88132E969123D14D9BD844E1CD516EDE130CF1A2OPEXCLILMA3corp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

WG,

 

As one of the authors of draft-ietf-lisp-typ= e-iana, I believe the document is ready to move forward.<= /p>

 

Cheers,

 

Christian.

 

De : lisp [mailto:lisp-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Luigi Iannone
Envoy=E9 : mercredi 17 ao=FBt 2016 22:59
=C0 : LISP mailing list list
Cc : lisp-chairs@ietf.org
Objet : [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.tx= t

 

Hi All,

 

The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & I= ANA Registry for LISP Packet 

Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l= isp-type-iana-00] asked for WG Last Call. 

 

This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, = to end August 31st, 2016.

 

Please review this WG document and let the WG know i= f you agree that it is ready for handing to the AD.

If you have objections, please state your reasons wh= y, and explain what it would take to address your concerns.

 

Thanks


Luigi & Joel

______________________________________________________________________=
___________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confiden=
tielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu=
 ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages el=
ectroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou =
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged inf=
ormation that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and dele=
te this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been =
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
--_000_88132E969123D14D9BD844E1CD516EDE130CF1A2OPEXCLILMA3corp_-- From nobody Wed Aug 24 14:06:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BB712D66B; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:06:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.448 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G0ABSQd0Yj9O; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.tcb.net (mail.tcb.net [64.78.239.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18EB612D124; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.tcb.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7489FB4; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:06:52 -0600 (MDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mailnew.seatmates.net Received: from mail.tcb.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.chasingbugles.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9Gsll8NEmclQ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:06:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mail.tcb.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.tcb.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BEFDA1; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:06:50 -0600 (MDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_70df0451b26e0c235c7c2cca8ba7f0fa" Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 17:06:50 -0400 From: Danny McPherson To: rtg-ads@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, farinacci@gmail.com, bew@cisco.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9a0ab6afeff3fc8b86cc320a757ccbf8@tcb.net> X-Sender: danny@tcb.net User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.5 Archived-At: Cc: Jonathan Hardwick , zhang.xian@huawei.com, jon.hudson@gmail.com Subject: [lisp] RTG-DIR REVIEW: draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-06.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:06:56 -0000 --=_70df0451b26e0c235c7c2cca8ba7f0fa Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 RTG-DIR REVIEW: draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-06.txt Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-06.txt Reviewer: Danny McPherson Review Date: August 24, 2016 Intended Status: Experimental Summary: I have some minor concerns about this document that should be considered before publication. Comments: I believe the draft is technically sound. Major Issues: I have no "Major" issues with this I-D. Minor Issues: In the Security Considerations section a small amount of text might be useful that discusses end-end v. encryption from middle boxes, and the risks therein. There are clearly benefits to this over no encryption, but there are risks about assumptions that may be made thereafter as well. Nits: S.1: s/typically not modified. Which means/typically not modified, which means/ S.1: Is there in fact a case where asymmetries result in the *same* egress xTRs but different keys are used? I believe this would just apply to "different xTRs", no? : However, return traffic uses the same procedures but with different key values by the same xTRs or potentially different xTRs when the paths between LISP sites are asymmetric. S.1: Regarding "[t]his document has the following requirements for the solutions space", it might be useful to reference some general IETF privacy work, even RFC 6973 or the like. Given that it's Experimental I think it's fine as is, but some references for the broader community may be in order. In particular, references to not requiring a separate PKI (and therefore external or circular dependencies!), avoiding third party trust anchor, rekeying as good operational practice, not just compromises, and other such arguments might be reinforced. S.3: Could include LCAF here, perhaps. S.4: You could probably strike this entire sentence and lessen confusion: "When an ETR (when it is also an ITR) encapsulates packets to this ITR (when it is also an ETR), a separate key exchange and shared-secret computation is performed." S.7: It's unclear what constitutes "Diffie-Hellman *group*". S.7: s/the the/the/ S.7: s/integrity-check/integrity check/ S.8: Editors note to strike text in last paragraph here, unclear what resolution was from this text. S.12.1: A reference to the SAAG comments might be useful here? S 13: Are you sure you want a default FCFS allocation policy here and not a slightly higher bar? Throughout: Consistent hyphenation in the document would help (e.g., "network-byte" ..). Throughout: Expanding on first use of each acronym would be useful, perhaps with references. --=_70df0451b26e0c235c7c2cca8ba7f0fa Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

RTG-DIR REVIEW: draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-06.txt


Hello,
I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this = draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-relat= ed drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometime= s on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to= the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, pleas= e see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Altho= ugh these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would b= e helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call co= mments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or b= y updating the draft.



Document: draft-ietf-lisp-cryp= to-06.txt

Reviewer: Danny McPherson

Review Date: Augu= st 24, 2016

Intended Status: Experimental



Summary:

 I have some minor concerns about this document t= hat should be considered before publication.




C= omments:

I believe the draft is technically sound.

<= br />

Major Issues:

I have no “Major” iss= ues with this I-D.




Minor Issues:

In= the Security Considerations section a small amount of text might be useful= that discusses end-end v. encryption from middle boxes, and the risks ther= ein.  There are clearly benefits to this over no encryption, but there= are risks about assumptions that may be made thereafter as well.



Nits:

S.1: s/typically not modified.  Which m= eans/typically not modified, which means/

S.1: Is there in fact = a case where asymmetries result in the *same* egress xTRs but different key= s are used?  I believe this would just apply to "different xTRs", no?&= nbsp; :

        However, retu= rn traffic uses the same procedures but with different key values by the sa= me xTRs or potentially different xTRs when the paths between LISP sites are= asymmetric.

S.1: Regarding "[t]his document has the following r= equirements for the solutions space", it might be useful to reference some = general IETF privacy work, even RFC 6973 or the like.  Given that it's= Experimental I think it's fine as is, but some references for the broader = community may be in order.  In particular, references to not requiring= a separate PKI (and therefore external or circular dependencies!), avoidin= g third party trust anchor, rekeying as good operational practice, not just= compromises,  and other such arguments might be reinforced.
S.3: Could include LCAF here, perhaps.

S.4: You could probabl= y strike this entire sentence and lessen confusion: "When an ETR (when it i= s also an ITR) encapsulates packets to this ITR (when it is also an ETR), a= separate key exchange and shared-secret computation is performed.”
S.7: It’s unclear what constitutes “Diffie-Hellman *g= roup*”.

S.7: s/the the/the/

S.7: s/integrity-ch= eck/integrity check/

S.8: Editors note to strike text in last pa= ragraph here, unclear what resolution was from this text.  

S.12.1: A reference to the SAAG comments might be useful here?

= S 13: Are you sure you want a default FCFS allocation policy here and not a= slightly higher bar?

Throughout: Consistent hyphenation in the = document would help (e.g., “network-byte” ..).  

Throughout: Expanding on first use of each acronym would be useful, perha= ps with references. 


     &= nbsp;         

--=_70df0451b26e0c235c7c2cca8ba7f0fa-- From nobody Sat Aug 27 05:34:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A0712D51A for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PyPbxv88WgjB for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x234.google.com (mail-yw0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6B5712D518 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x234.google.com with SMTP id z8so63222179ywa.1 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date:subject:message-id :to; bh=3Y3PIY96hp9/v+1ZbFuRo3Cdqkw72WP8HFrJFE2R/OI=; b=d5cFkx70+M8nQJL3+Kx39SA2814zoNDpoO3aDLElIke8Zn5lXFgvuvBi8r+ZfTwEeO jmy2LaT4RvDVSofVejbypghgAHoNCNz37eZFyK23bJYP1VhqpasEoBexP521kvAj3PVW A9fe0qFE0BQltQ5+cqDGa43EPywoXmRJf59FY5hWur1cu5Um850w28kfUpon1if9NKQg G71KCBcQtxbN5c8d7CnefMOq9PUfYm0PD5D6BaGGeLJ6tEWueVFCZoDh2JHPtdoFQy1P GRelIg9zcXPu4dn2lke27AHwDIVn/pU/Y+39jdxrmpXOQDL+B/P71WKKFHAcshQf74rx CnHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date :subject:message-id:to; bh=3Y3PIY96hp9/v+1ZbFuRo3Cdqkw72WP8HFrJFE2R/OI=; b=cX60nvYIGqXnZJnZR65lZQzCfWhhGwl575lLkCuade0NnNFQ1ncH+wIGPLzCfUMhqo uLHZWHKtsvrMXiXuaVNXxjluvxKYCfAGWO7nOCjIyEWXpy29kWOws8OQazF4IES8ODeM pegTB1FNhamqrU1JIyHFWnThhiXW/D632dKb0fX5Qrb8Sr1bk4qHrAQfIh47lhuINYM8 aHVKF6apcQUW3yY4vm1KleBOce2QLxH7X7nnY8vswfUjL+OpNONU1PMP/ntRMblopAnB 62GvCcXSlt3bn/jn02HVZbg0y6+MMvwyAkYXxz2GLFhlg6fuLJldl+xduOzqGaeWhgqP 6avg== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPpwNDbd6/fdiPxJOPDf+lYHaPPk3v7qjY9Z3lNgY3oo9yeVB8c0vO6f+BnShztCA== X-Received: by 10.13.221.20 with SMTP id g20mr7236649ywe.189.1472301247149; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [100.102.106.133] (99.sub-70-214-65.myvzw.com. [70.214.65.99]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d141sm12533296ywh.15.2016.08.27.05.34.05 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 27 Aug 2016 05:34:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Sharon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 08:34:04 -0400 Message-Id: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> To: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13G36) Archived-At: Subject: [lisp] Lisp for 5G X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 12:34:09 -0000 I know folks have been working on lisp for mobile wireless access. If in 5G (mobility/handover) are indeed factored out of ( AAA/Charging) |-> = into pure IP overlay edge networking .. Did anyone look at a weighted/probability based ID-Location schema where ITR= chooses ETR by applying a "fuzzy" selection logic for moving identities? (m= ovable && moving things) *edge to mean provider edge PE/XTR: RAN <> XTR <> underlay <> XTR <> Internet "Pro-choice" ETR balanced selection is already providing better capacity-uti= lization within a service providers. This can be an extension. Interesting to know what's been done already.. --szb= From nobody Sat Aug 27 10:17:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D64912B032 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QuFbXamlNSCF for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x244.google.com (mail-qk0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4759712B008 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x244.google.com with SMTP id v123so7763497qkh.3 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=+JgrE5++GDXfiXHlS8PAwtLjSxWM4utfIsHkPA6kzoc=; b=hOfpbNcLk00vBvPQsGs+4pg21B5uUCnA3qPwqCN08kLlJrIgbcqq5Hkj24JkZbjjkJ 959Rmry26Elcudr+X9jK6w0P/uQEBf1OHVBqGKpkDVZYimCiOA8pLxoi1Hb2BRUMFPCs n0dUr4p7tFKTS43KffNzCjXycPtQ0fx8A7BjjBQ2TLtF8mx1c+YAKZ7OARGViGFP/nm7 fPpNWnS4LWG369PNDzUr3bvYaWlbMD9V3ChQsZTuoCqVHZkush1Pq1yFh/z50w7Jt7AY dpcxOjv6owLf2cVM2KgxwcgeJ+Jw6Pv4ar58IfV5MPZpV6U6CXG3LIUVqO1Y6m0jx6Ky CGlw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=+JgrE5++GDXfiXHlS8PAwtLjSxWM4utfIsHkPA6kzoc=; b=gw32ir/83iVCz70med1TUAmrgLCXaNzN0qwkqBhYtF5jaaaY6Zz26UpJJfOLV3PVrN J9aIvCTBphbF6m9jSMwq8K0JLx6AvZWm4ru8F3+/Y5TbB/ca+TjJdTuXhXC0TYKzbzAt 24dU8RoFLasdnX1kPECJdS6Zd/n6uLuJE/2lZU4ZWf32hthj+wksmvdivdzugvkMDUOY pKjzpHAl5IbQ+KiOsZPdpPPE0WHCHArnRqccwB5TM6DXxsQOB+9Jojn4NdponT5M0auZ RFpvCAu9Q8APTnEC6jHUtLrk4UQktth6pE6I1jbKs9K/QX4E6kcwWUT1gYzyXdbcvHlk KWMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwNJNkr1/GiTBjywIGnbdR0WdDPs8wIZJL8FK6fxbiPz/YvysGHcK5zhZkT/mxckNQ== X-Received: by 10.55.217.132 with SMTP id q4mr9568624qkl.221.1472318234464; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.220.145.246] ([166.170.30.12]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i65sm13461943qtb.18.2016.08.27.10.17.12 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 27 Aug 2016 10:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-298EFFD6-F361-445F-BC75-58F90ADA1048 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Dino Farinacci Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 12:34:03 -0400 Message-Id: <9CCD7FDA-A935-4245-AD71-ADB1707C3727@gmail.com> References: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> To: Sharon X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14A5345a) Archived-At: Cc: lisp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] Lisp for 5G X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 17:17:16 -0000 --Apple-Mail-298EFFD6-F361-445F-BC75-58F90ADA1048 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Did anyone look at a weighted/probability based ID-Location schema where I= TR chooses ETR by applying a "fuzzy" selection logic for moving identities? (= movable && moving things) In draft-meyer-lisp-mn we created a requirement and spec'ed out the M-bit in= the Map-Register message.=20 The intent was to allow an ITR or PITR to know that an ETR was acting in beh= alf of an EID that moved often. Thereby allowing the ITR/PITR to flush its c= ache often as an alternative to waiting for SMR messages from the ETR or Map= -Notify messages from map-servers.=20 Do you think this mechanism is sufficient for your requirement? And yes, the priority and weights can be manipulated so the encapsulator has= choice to choose another ETR.=20 Dino= --Apple-Mail-298EFFD6-F361-445F-BC75-58F90ADA1048 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Did anyone look at a weight= ed/probability based ID-Location schema where ITR chooses ETR by applying a "= fuzzy" selection logic for moving identities? (movable && moving thi= ngs)

In draft-meyer-lisp-mn we created a requirement and spec'ed ou= t the M-bit in the Map-Register message. 

The intent was to al= low an ITR or PITR to know that an ETR was acting in behalf of an EID that m= oved often. Thereby allowing the ITR/PITR to flush its cache often as an alt= ernative to waiting for SMR messages from the ETR or Map-Notify messages fro= m map-servers. 

Do you think this mechanism is sufficient for y= our requirement?

And yes, the priority and weights can be manipulat= ed so the encapsulator has choice to choose another ETR. 

Dino=
= --Apple-Mail-298EFFD6-F361-445F-BC75-58F90ADA1048-- From nobody Sat Aug 27 15:56:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E944412D149 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tnilHeuqxuOI for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x22e.google.com (mail-yw0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E8BF12B016 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id u134so67946177ywg.3 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=n12eM9T6/eGqK+7JN6VDRPUAfkHx62sxjBfsBORpWxU=; b=EFszF7Rvs8JsNizIsu0kGa7Oj9nBdBHgpIEqPnWAPBSI3qdJ1r9Hi+T25pWQ4ySE/f oc/i2qi4apwdwjK3XnLmwQ8Wv0dHtwJ8rJFq2QUW1PVMlHz8XejvBnkGyfswgyWG2Ivy +sgZALaa7wz5xA2cPHHqQMSvKMCpfq6o1aWNY9P9vk+6CrcambBr+ca0bnjwkeHIiGaW 9nIdqcvrh1uUVjw2HehU1L/TdyY2ztFaEO4nNhFo+NgsHrSo7GIm+L7tjIDFj1ay13mv SzgQ1kjfYYTWXRj0+mAieILS8lWV6A2CDBJUmzLgWato6GSRnO/BG9JdMTYecIQwaAyl cEOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=n12eM9T6/eGqK+7JN6VDRPUAfkHx62sxjBfsBORpWxU=; b=Li8gQT2crvqTK9aOn2k5rVg/gcqpnQLx7UzvLvO833brSgn07FQvrKD+4kwXaXsXdh WpDgKVzbl+PGXEKoKhsLzxLTf2UIn9YMnJ/vecECeFgXi4u4wZ6GWBaAQLC411v+rbA9 +avwTI4MJHaUb4nblj2yuFc1HerNULuMX6IJwmUNh/oQON0l8t1FU8Z2ln2rO4YTqGbs HVRK+EjH2hgiFI9zc61qrR/SVNfEFOiTfqGpY05+9iq+DMd4/x/MutXjbC7YvYtO7G6Y xCK5WR1VruCL9qByCCCD4mH7uiHFXs2R87RN68b/5hKJt255N2VvP7kIVvkQ7Cz2KUX2 zULA== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPB6ZAaEGVJHNbPLL8YNegKb4GQA0XsT3AFvyknCnqrujMY4oGGr6XRIHsySHtDLA== X-Received: by 10.13.217.20 with SMTP id b20mr9573392ywe.44.1472338596480; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1017:b409:74db:880a:5010:b2d2:a52c? ([2600:1017:b409:74db:880a:5010:b2d2:a52c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c13sm13478996ywa.19.2016.08.27.15.56.35 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 27 Aug 2016 15:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-22464E0A-4106-4D35-BFDB-778A193888BE Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Sharon X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13G36) In-Reply-To: <9CCD7FDA-A935-4245-AD71-ADB1707C3727@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 18:56:33 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> <9CCD7FDA-A935-4245-AD71-ADB1707C3727@gmail.com> To: Dino Farinacci Archived-At: Cc: lisp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] Lisp for 5G X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 22:56:39 -0000 --Apple-Mail-22464E0A-4106-4D35-BFDB-778A193888BE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Maybe we should go in a draft through all the mechanisms, multi home, bits, S= mr .. specifically in the context of handover=20 Perhaps a heads up message from the mobile device is needed before fully m= oving from ETR to ETR ... --szb > On Aug 27, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote: >=20 > Did anyone look at a weighted/probability based ID-Location schema where I= TR chooses ETR by applying a "fuzzy" selection logic for moving identities? (= movable && moving things) >=20 > In draft-meyer-lisp-mn we created a requirement and spec'ed out the M-bit i= n the Map-Register message.=20 >=20 > The intent was to allow an ITR or PITR to know that an ETR was acting in b= ehalf of an EID that moved often. Thereby allowing the ITR/PITR to flush its= cache often as an alternative to waiting for SMR messages from the ETR or M= ap-Notify messages from map-servers.=20 >=20 > Do you think this mechanism is sufficient for your requirement? >=20 > And yes, the priority and weights can be manipulated so the encapsulator h= as choice to choose another ETR.=20 >=20 > Dino --Apple-Mail-22464E0A-4106-4D35-BFDB-778A193888BE Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Maybe we should go in a draft through a= ll the mechanisms, multi home, bits, Smr ..
specifically in the context of handover 
Perhaps a heads up message from the mobile device  is needed b= efore fully  moving from ETR to ETR ...

--szb

On A= ug 27, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:

Did anyone look at a weighted/probability based ID-Lo= cation schema where ITR chooses ETR by applying a "fuzzy" selection logic fo= r moving identities? (movable && moving things)

In draft-me= yer-lisp-mn we created a requirement and spec'ed out the M-bit in the Map-Re= gister message. 

The intent was to allow an ITR or PITR to kno= w that an ETR was acting in behalf of an EID that moved often. Thereby allow= ing the ITR/PITR to flush its cache often as an alternative to waiting for S= MR messages from the ETR or Map-Notify messages from map-servers. 

Do you think this mechanism is sufficient for your requirement?


Dino
= --Apple-Mail-22464E0A-4106-4D35-BFDB-778A193888BE-- From nobody Sun Aug 28 06:11:37 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D208512D18F for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id znYSVMxC8PDW for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x235.google.com (mail-qt0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8367C12D186 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x235.google.com with SMTP id w38so57580801qtb.0 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=jol9/Wv6easkXV5CR+F71ohLigG4o6jYeancXLpaYA4=; b=dMkH5EisTuam+6ECYIubqE3amF5NdjXIulO/YerH4bsD0UksbI/H5OKS6p+DQeEFEh ZNvrpXriOz0xVcMIUYD3aDNpmAEgJLSy/x3Q26HnAv+rR2Rh+2MZm6L3OGOUS7j3XOZ0 qgkGOtbyILl+/Fn+qvYaHsOA4NcHerreztaLsgoyunMnalfEEhYw3jtzZMQg7wIIaHnZ n6e7f9BKh139hFssnRne0uoPmruQeGxmax0noYz6QsN2GRZRVom/jhxBqX473DS8s/Rw rSAY/go991N6y6wPba4rb/uAfMAkr03i30zy5BxQJhy4EuPoNxgnuSjR+/Arbmtg/7Qm DP6Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=jol9/Wv6easkXV5CR+F71ohLigG4o6jYeancXLpaYA4=; b=DT0voYNgiKQ8f/BIYQt4BRh7fQb1T3LAQJixwMDAsp+2HuGhUREFTXc6x9Ngh1Q12p ayAm+kLF8wUxY8mv537N/2Ei8Ia2c1nj6/ehU4zU0dyUwqzOMfLw4mBhJbPX/Uby60/R HHZ83LCQ4oCB2Tah6EBuqh/srq5uHBsorS6pojGGqWE3xF3TBeyDMrK2XfMJ00Lncuno +A0ALB3zj9uZxqnztaZlWAolX+SfTkBCwlezRgB+SQGBTmpETZfO07s9o0iRWrL4NamE YsSgmwvRu66EZFPWYeCF1BHkj0mVzuPlUGy6UgsmTYs/OcFcyxfS0DGWyFyEgBVeAsZ+ qWTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOIbXzlUs9ywwLMSgEfod8W6GSqsmja+1dsqlbUfffqPKg2k44Ky3vnYiJT5veZ6w== X-Received: by 10.237.37.58 with SMTP id v55mr13548772qtc.9.1472389894680; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.0.156] (96-83-121-173-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [96.83.121.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f62sm15630386qka.3.2016.08.28.06.11.34 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Dino Farinacci In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:11:38 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4D4F4BB5-01A5-4CCA-80F5-EABB38CACC76@gmail.com> References: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> <9CCD7FDA-A935-4245-AD71-ADB1707C3727@gmail.com> To: Sharon Barkai X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: lisp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] Lisp for 5G X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 13:11:37 -0000 > Maybe we should go in a draft through all the mechanisms, multi home, = bits, Smr .. > specifically in the context of handover=20 > Perhaps a heads up message from the mobile device is needed before = fully moving from ETR to ETR =E2=80=A6 Some of this is already in the draft-portoles-lisp-eid-mobility draft. = Please have a look at it and give us detailed comments about what you = see is missing. And we will add. Maybe this is a good time to ask the working group to have a detailed = look at draft-portoles-lisp-eid-mobility since other working groups are = looking at LISP to solve the mobility problem (as well as SDOs like 3GPP = and ETSI). So comments are welcome!!! Dino From nobody Sun Aug 28 06:16:13 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CA9812B034 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TM66CFgeGwfo for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x22c.google.com (mail-yb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F4DA12B00C for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id h3so19417527ybi.2 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kaI45WJnsZRZmb7uf2MaQrM6y0I+6VgJEWWINOWwJJo=; b=vBmmYTcKqQ/kEdzBMcicPq8WFF/YQC1zqHM+XiRLCMqaHJ2oUdV8Z8r6Op6VX4MXJ3 ID33ilPUjUPb9z3pgEqDVd8h9CZbQncUpC7CuYD6i0ivHPTqhfnQ7R96vTLwq4UXjmKp YsUtlGSlG5dR9tc4o3YksCZ8DIlIcJ6hoKPxexFL+5JURxbKQa7cts/JGje4PglRHhbW o2RiDlvdT/USewiDtYhNo/im3eAmxdTeHCAYRKzqC6J5K//00XoYYOkG/15fVDdo+R/X X2bqNpx55H8a1rh9XEnCoIJcDjeOoHfgOlHe3xjZmHGk+ByT4tWao6j9bRdnfVtv9IRb NY0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kaI45WJnsZRZmb7uf2MaQrM6y0I+6VgJEWWINOWwJJo=; b=RhUi6CzljlSGyDEQeY9aeoWuHjcdlvXTNOM/b0636RoBOPgsGBQJ11sh2OHGU0brF7 agfgDVorcaaEcOAc9PTszfElCZ/oEMrJS4kozqKjRgiT79nbHhJtZniNotQiIkc4WH1J swTqa9YmC/yVNwu199YSzIpcSazpNt1aRrDJVO0ErNqOSbPGoruAq6xY4FnfiHLrLQkl X4Yk31cCJ3XSSdfeMysmyTzLYTkYeGX2IBtadQVpvy1UNmUKFioaUVG/vDl3f2HIU9eO Yh+c6wyy3rOQFE6HW5jSiNEAPKdMixfmPiG5GlF7+bUY1rKqtJAABS7j9ZCb3o8k0lhs r3/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwND5IFwyn7X1ZmPPbPUMALbXwJqdtt5PLIFTF3qxX2Oj/AzaECPVki5T4DCfEGiwg== X-Received: by 10.37.14.196 with SMTP id 187mr10177050ybo.26.1472390171410; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [100.86.156.54] (49.sub-70-214-72.myvzw.com. [70.214.72.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z193sm14500526ywa.34.2016.08.28.06.16.09 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Aug 2016 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Sharon X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13G36) In-Reply-To: <4D4F4BB5-01A5-4CCA-80F5-EABB38CACC76@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:16:08 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61134D40-B829-428F-B2A9-E019964EA3DB@gmail.com> References: <099C4B79-7704-46C1-8964-844C5D093E9B@gmail.com> <9CCD7FDA-A935-4245-AD71-ADB1707C3727@gmail.com> <4D4F4BB5-01A5-4CCA-80F5-EABB38CACC76@gmail.com> To: Dino Farinacci Archived-At: Cc: lisp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] Lisp for 5G X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 13:16:13 -0000 Will take a look. Thanks! --szb On Aug 28, 2016, at 9:11 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> Maybe we should go in a draft through all the mechanisms, multi home, bit= s, Smr .. >> specifically in the context of handover=20 >> Perhaps a heads up message from the mobile device is needed before fully= moving from ETR to ETR =E2=80=A6 >=20 > Some of this is already in the draft-portoles-lisp-eid-mobility draft. Ple= ase have a look at it and give us detailed comments about what you see is mi= ssing. And we will add. >=20 > Maybe this is a good time to ask the working group to have a detailed look= at draft-portoles-lisp-eid-mobility since other working groups are looking a= t LISP to solve the mobility problem (as well as SDOs like 3GPP and ETSI). >=20 > So comments are welcome!!! >=20 > Dino >=20 From nobody Tue Aug 30 03:09:19 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A1A212D1A3 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HeW1wQhI1m-S for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F3CA12D197 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id d196so21465891wmd.0 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=Z2m2QlV1gNF+w9J51XRmwr/utk9C+hYKRUyFkGPeHzM=; b=m+EnioGjiM6mx52Fi7/KYakaC/DD3xOWFjjhKAdVS9UH6AAcEUTrz3cezd5tvBPEww pN34/6I8W977Tgmgx0IRCf+sB8SqZOwUzlAjqatgd2HwDgpeLaGBW+idozM8U9DmRrP+ l373JdWWGKr14EJI5iRanUAvt3HKpmqHC4esZzFGs7eFStOsf+85BQP0Md4BkPcI5qu1 2RVmNBejJMoUWOqPBy3seTXYMPrEk2xbnN7S4/E90yU++t3gjUwLvDZZXy+NkJ0/qxP/ YagXTSLWl5dRD/SPrCM4gBiHUVLtISTl0uWm5lNAHMDGLaj9xjGqJeJg+tIstuwX505R wS0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=Z2m2QlV1gNF+w9J51XRmwr/utk9C+hYKRUyFkGPeHzM=; b=KKzmmUDmEdlg8PRJeVUxJc1BydxtJLiFjcRlE/2kOiuI2dkNFsA+RYk9z8N91hxaeM K3cxeeHGVsms2rgYnN0PSRDqhsqdirmaBHOLLSp/p+vy/0s64D6LYJdIzujzVNHOVNPG PMCPypJ7Her2bbjf/Q/W9KSistGdYVPxQ7c3JWRw3pJKvRceFJexRXC8lJ+GTFy+Ajbh H2+qEojwBOdlfD23fakIqrGdsAViovwANEOyig4H6lZyWU5AfusO12y8dU0HLQuutCP7 srPYZGTlSLkTLABln2ZvjvadnCxmD4fTaBBjTrnFjMdsEI7AROuW6Y6dj1ACc8pwlD96 NEjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPIUI9t8ODsK4F7FAxegQZYj8M2B3N+8AjMosThpO/UOhe0KL27jGoevQ/5IC3/9w== X-Received: by 10.28.230.205 with SMTP id e74mr2923592wmi.42.1472551753775; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:660:330f:a4:dcdf:e82a:5f9b:172? ([2001:660:330f:a4:dcdf:e82a:5f9b:172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 4sm17879795wmu.2.2016.08.30.03.09.12 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0D73FB8E-8B50-4E62-BDFF-323179F12249" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Luigi Iannone In-Reply-To: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 12:09:12 +0200 Message-Id: References: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> To: LISP mailing list list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 10:09:19 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_0D73FB8E-8B50-4E62-BDFF-323179F12249 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Folks, This call will close soon, please express your opinion on whether this = document is ready or not for the IESG. Silence is not consensus. ciao L. > On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58, Luigi Iannone wrote: >=20 > Hi All, >=20 > The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP = Packet=20 > Type Allocations = [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00 = ] asked for WG = Last Call.=20 >=20 > This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August = 31st, 2016. >=20 > Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that = it is ready for handing to the AD. > If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain = what it would take to address your concerns. >=20 > Thanks >=20 > Luigi & Joel --Apple-Mail=_0D73FB8E-8B50-4E62-BDFF-323179F12249 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Folks,

This call will close soon, please express your opinion on = whether this document is ready or not for the IESG.

Silence is not = consensus.

ciao

L.


On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> = wrote:

Hi All,

The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA = Registry for LISP Packet 
Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] = asked for WG Last Call. 

This email starts the usual two weeks = WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2016.

Please review this WG = document and let the WG know if you agree that it is ready for handing = to the AD.
If you have objections, please = state your reasons why, and explain what it would take to address your = concerns.

Thanks

Luigi & = Joel

= --Apple-Mail=_0D73FB8E-8B50-4E62-BDFF-323179F12249-- From nobody Tue Aug 30 04:18:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8F212D176; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id im4gMFCKokp7; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 181D912B071; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id t7so14523568qkh.1; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7jhX7g4wqKg6qasAe0WsWqHpZ5xqAuchEPg3z8/O6UE=; b=CuwdGLhJJNoz+8gidUg+fL7WBNdZoNMnpOVIfw6agqJhD2O4rxYoHTNKpE33GjmXiI GURoKbMlviVAadJe2SJ4oPul+5KQwb56Y/XOGik4iqgJwV6RiQDQWGu3qvTa4DH1uqTC NIc4j4xYaKYuGLYL6NXCC/GMqCN2Q07+gYFqw7CZYLuMDmmdzJzKtDaq4N80g5qkkTKB 2RlQ8dHxhbYtOkZ2dVM3zyM4i8J7SMxdqjyJzyDd+82fNOac6+bq68fzAflvJJuoGp5L 6kypLm6Dae2+GWJVWLy5Rh2N2A5plSKn0CBwQNZOneDopboV1HUgaf7qaus+deZ8ry2W WtMw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7jhX7g4wqKg6qasAe0WsWqHpZ5xqAuchEPg3z8/O6UE=; b=CIrWyzg3ubZwgC2wv4CaRb4b0J9+GFJZ7fd0EPezPik7EhVddjn9qcpTvmUBdBj9Uh UtUO5vvMt3yqoKTuKD8c8sp4o35VBDO7sATxFAIy/CW7dJuQtrKY0eI0LPIXR9SHrH4t noQNXgA8vssXe51ep8OsToYI9cVoNKqehY99GNzt+TVLL+j7Zu5Ceb3ioVdkzpCI7Ul3 1I8VGLdpqmAh8qbSju2dY1Dg0Z2BRApZEZhr/Rk66JOGoRbeLi+pqfUNCoqKdiZuA0ZU vjpL3MTs4+RmluUDdMPePLYYHdOMQQimizfzCn+aWrKEghsvvRN9t+j22od4EMx+5+pr TRyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMReNjgPzhvt8wqIkihro6RB720tVufMG727fwv+jFKss4RDz533RAg/vA96F2gXA== X-Received: by 10.55.42.85 with SMTP id q82mr3265667qkh.242.1472555915274; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.220.145.246] ([166.170.30.12]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h25sm21334033qtc.38.2016.08.30.04.18.34 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2CAF0468-C249-48B7-B4CD-0BE9CDC7C2AE Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Dino Farinacci X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14A5345a) In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 07:18:33 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> To: Luigi Iannone Archived-At: Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org, LISP mailing list list Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:18:39 -0000 --Apple-Mail-2CAF0468-C249-48B7-B4CD-0BE9CDC7C2AE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is ready for IESG IMO.=20 DIino > On Aug 30, 2016, at 6:09 AM, Luigi Iannone wrote: >=20 > Folks, >=20 > This call will close soon, please express your opinion on whether this doc= ument is ready or not for the IESG. >=20 > Silence is not consensus. >=20 > ciao >=20 > L. >=20 >=20 >> On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58, Luigi Iannone wrote: >>=20 >> Hi All, >>=20 >> The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Pac= ket=20 >> Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-0= 0] asked for WG Last Call.=20 >>=20 >> This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2= 016. >>=20 >> Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it i= s ready for handing to the AD. >> If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what i= t would take to address your concerns. >>=20 >> Thanks >>=20 >> Luigi & Joel >=20 > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp --Apple-Mail-2CAF0468-C249-48B7-B4CD-0BE9CDC7C2AE Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is ready for IESG IMO. 

=
DIino

On Aug 30, 2016= , at 6:09 AM, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.n= et> wrote:

Folks,

This call will cl= ose soon, please express your opinion on whether this document is ready or n= ot for the IESG.

S= ilence is not consensus.

ciao

L.


<= blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">
On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58= , Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.ne= t> wrote:

Hi All,

The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & I= ANA Registry for LISP Packet 
Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for WG= Last Call. 

= This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2016= .

= Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is r= eady for handing to the AD.
If you have objection= s, please state your reasons why, and explain what it would take to address y= our concerns.

Thanks

Luigi & Joel
<= /div>

=
_______________________________________= ________
lisp mailing list
lisp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp<= /span>
= --Apple-Mail-2CAF0468-C249-48B7-B4CD-0BE9CDC7C2AE-- From nobody Wed Aug 31 02:04:55 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5F312DA4C for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 02:04:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.448 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lZIUGi8q-3co for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 02:04:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway.mail.vnu.edu.vn (gateway.mail.vnu.edu.vn [203.113.130.199]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A84512DA53 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 02:04:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 11163 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2016 16:04:47 +0700 Received: from unknown (HELO vnu.edu.vn) (112.137.129.12) by gateway.mail.vnu.edu.vn with SMTP; 31 Aug 2016 16:04:47 +0700 Received: (qmail 3011 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2016 16:04:36 +0700 Received: from portablephung.rsr.lip6.fr (HELO ?132.227.85.173?) (dungpc@132.227.85.173) by vnu.edu.vn with SMTP; 31 Aug 2016 16:04:36 +0700 To: LISP mailing list list References: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> From: Phung Chi Dung Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:03:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------3D7223DBC27CDFC862EAD983" Archived-At: Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 09:04:53 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------3D7223DBC27CDFC862EAD983 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all, +1 for this one. Best, PCD. On 30/08/2016 12:09, Luigi Iannone wrote: > Folks, > > This call will close soon, please express your opinion on whether this > document is ready or not for the IESG. > > Silence is not consensus. > > ciao > > L. > > >> On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58, Luigi Iannone > > wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP >> Packet >> Type Allocations >> [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for >> WG Last Call. >> >> This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August >> 31st, 2016. >> >> Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that >> it is ready for handing to the AD. >> If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain >> what it would take to address your concerns. >> >> Thanks >> >> Luigi & Joel > > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp --------------3D7223DBC27CDFC862EAD983 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dear all,

+1 for this one.

Best,

PCD.


On 30/08/2016 12:09, Luigi Iannone wrote:
Folks,

This call will close soon, please express your opinion on whether this document is ready or not for the IESG.

Silence is not consensus.

ciao

L.


On 17 Aug 2016, at 22:58, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:

Hi All,

The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet 
Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for WG Last Call. 

This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2016.

Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is ready for handing to the AD.
If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what it would take to address your concerns.
Thanks

Luigi & Joel



_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
lisp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

--------------3D7223DBC27CDFC862EAD983-- From nobody Wed Aug 31 17:45:18 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC1A12D7D2 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:45:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.068 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w7Qqthj4dEoS for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F1F312D7CB for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:45:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3688; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1472690716; x=1473900316; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=0RfZnzl0Xe+yu3jpm7ISoUeUBkVOAwtnB31YBCYf+1k=; b=VHLzB3lUPSp9TCR+Sm0fW0IwakBljTHMouhzpUpHYTM+sUe+p5rSG+aW 9F0KQse98xEq0MEO8iwGMFXhPc1EmERTVuXbL2Yazy180+SkWig9cVlTw P6zYn8LVkT4Cz2VNrc378f42Y1ANyZH6voYCZyh6qM0zoXPJP5pgsWzx6 s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BVBgBoecdX/5tdJa1dg1ABAQEBAR5XK?= =?us-ascii?q?lKzG4UNggEkhXgCgUo4FAECAQEBAQEBAV4nhGIBBQEBG1EbCwQULicwEwYCAQG?= =?us-ascii?q?IRA67IwEBAQEBBQEBAQEBAQEbBYYvgXiCVYQSEQFohRAFjxqKNoYgiRGBbYRdg?= =?us-ascii?q?xGEWIEkjEiDeR42hFEcNIRNgh8BAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,264,1470700800"; d="scan'208,217";a="316116115" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Sep 2016 00:45:15 +0000 Received: from [10.24.17.117] ([10.24.17.117]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u810jEY2006584 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 00:45:15 GMT To: lisp@ietf.org References: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> From: Fabio Maino Message-ID: <94c95e23-b2d8-ced7-64e4-7f00bb13c834@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:45:14 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <983495DD-BDFE-474C-90D1-F32DDE09D286@gigix.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------69B0E3F03CC35622D51EBF54" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00.txt X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:45:17 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------69B0E3F03CC35622D51EBF54 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I support moving this document forward. Fabio On 8/17/16 1:58 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote: > Hi All, > > The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP > Packet > Type Allocations > [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for > WG Last Call. > > This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August > 31st, 2016. > > Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that > it is ready for handing to the AD. > If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain > what it would take to address your concerns. > > Thanks > > Luigi & Joel > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp --------------69B0E3F03CC35622D51EBF54 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I support moving this document forward.

Fabio

On 8/17/16 1:58 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
Hi All,

The authors of the LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet 
Type Allocations [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-00] asked for WG Last Call. 

This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end August 31st, 2016.

Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is ready for handing to the AD.
If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what it would take to address your concerns.
Thanks

Luigi & Joel


_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
lisp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp


--------------69B0E3F03CC35622D51EBF54--