Re: [GROW] LISP at GROW

[Scott Brim <swb at employees.org>]

On 8/4/08 7:06 PM, Robert Raszuk allegedly wrote:
> |I do understand that ALT is based on logical GRE links. But I find
> it |hard to believe operationally that EID assignment, building ALT 
> |topology, strict hierarchy will be so good and as it is require to 
> |achieve ideal aggregation.

This sentence doesn't parse very well, but I'll guess at what you mean.
 The simple answer is that the ALT topology reflects EID assignment.
There is no question of "achieving ideal aggregation", or conflict
between EID assignment and BGP connectivity, because the BGP
connectivity itself reflects the aggregation.  Perhaps you could be
clearer about what you think the problem would be?

On 8/4/08 9:34 PM, Tony Li allegedly wrote:
> Moreover, even if it doesn instantaneously achieve ideal aggregation,
> what is to prevent future entropy?  

Again this phrase "achieve ideal aggregation".  Topology reflects 
addressing hierarchy, so there is no question.

> If a site wants to change its
> EIDs, it's forced to renumber.  

That's a tautology.

> If it changes its ISP but doesn't
> change its EIDs, then it's still locked into a 'mapping provider'.

I'm guessing you're concerned about business relationships.  Locked in? 
 First, you are already "locked in", for example to your DNS provider, 
and somehow you survive.  Second, the possibilities for business 
relationships are wide open.  For example the lowest levels of the ALT 
could be provided by small enterprises (like DNS names), and the key 
higher levels by non-profits.  So I think it's wildly premature to 
assume the worst.

swb

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
GROW at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow