Subject: [lisp] Issue Title (number): Lock in to EID Provider (84)

From: Darrel Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:19:08 -0700

Issue Title (number): Lock in to EID Provider (84)
Draft Section: 3
Issue Description: Ease of Renumbering
Comments:

In the Introduction:

3. Easing of renumbering burden when clients change providers.

    Because host EIDs are numbered from a separate, non-provider-
    assigned and non-topologically-bound space, they do not need to
    be renumbered when a client site changes its attachment points to
    the network.

At least with respect to LISP+ALT, this statement is incorrect. Sites are simply locked in to their EID provider instead of being locked in to their ISP as they are now. The lock-in would appear to be more severe than it is today, since unless strong aggregation is preserved, LISP's entire value proposition is lost.

Response:

Dear Yakov-

Thank you for your contribution to draft-ietf-lisp-06.txt. The draft authors
have reviewed your comments but do not feel that changes to the document are
warranted at this time. The you claim 'lock in' depends on the business model 
for EID assignment and mapping service providers. For instance, is a site 
numbered from Provider Independent addressing 'locked in' to their RIR?  
However, we think that there is nothing in the protocol specification 
requiring or forcing any sort of 'lock in' you claim above.  Please feel 
free to continue discussion of your issue on the LISP working group mailing 
list, [email-masked]. Should discussion result in WG consensus that changes 
are required, the authors will incorporate appropriate text into a future 
version of the draft.

	Thanks!
	Darrel, for the LISP document authors