> From: Robin Whittle <rw(_at_)firstpr(_dot_)com(_dot_)au>
> The LISP protocol does not introduce a new namespace for
> Identifiers (for hosts, interfaces or whatever).
The long-term concept is that it needs to be a phased introduction:
initially, IPvN addresses are used on both sides of the mapping in order to
minimize the amount of new stuff that has to be written/deployed before we
can start to make use of the system.
Once the mapping system, edge boxes, etc are widely deployed, then we can
move on to doing things like adding support for new namespace(s), but it will
(for the forseeable future) be on the locator side, not the identifier side,
for the simple reason that to deploy a new identifier namespace,
ubiquitously, means changing all the hosts, and that's just too hard. When a
new locator namespace is added, however, the hosts can remain blissfully
unaware of that.
If you look at the details of the mapping system, it carefully has hooks in it
for support of new namespaces, and in fact that have been (over the years) a
number of different suggestions for new locator namespaces (e.g. for use with
MPLS fabrics). Those are all still very much just suggestions, but if LISP
catches on I have no doubt that some will almost certainly happen.
Rome wasn't built in a day...
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf