On Nov 2, 2011, at 23:23 , Templin, Fred L wrote:
Thankfully, I missed most of the earlier threads related
to this. But, on the subject of identifiers, Robin is right.
What the IETF protocol known as LISP calls "identifiers" are
actually IP addresses. And, IP addresses name *interfaces*;
they do not name *end systems*. Same is true also of IRON.
In LISP (Locator/ID Separation Protocol) EID stands for Endpoint-ID.
Isn't the interface the endpoint of the Internet communication pipe?
AFAIR LISP never claims that an LEID identifies a host or a general end-system.
Luigi
Thanks - Fred
fred(_dot_)l(_dot_)templin(_at_)boeing(_dot_)com
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of Robin Whittle
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 10:34 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: LISP is not a Loc-ID Separation protocol
I wrote another explanation of why the LISP protocol does not
involve a
separate namespace for Identifiers - and so why it is not a Loc-ID
Separation protocol.
http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/namespace/lisp-not-loc-id/
This is a longer version of my arguments earlier in this
thread because
it assumes no knowledge of the LISP protocol or of the IRTF Routing
Research Group work in recent years on scalable routing.
Its good that the LISP protocol, Ivip and Iron are not Locator -
Identifier Separation protocols:
"Overloading" of Loc & ID functions is good for hosts and should be
maintained 2010-06-22
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg07017.html
- Robin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf