Subject: RE: [RRG] Renumbering...

From: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:34:47 -0700

Hi Scott,
 
|When a site network moves or merges it NEED NOT renumber -- 
|any increase
|in state is restricted to the first level of the mapping system and is
|quickly damped out.  There isn't any increase in state at the sites
|communicating with that site network either unless the network
|fragments.  The only thing that changes is the RLOCs.

Understood.  However, what happens when a site changes mapping provider?

My understanding is that the site must then change EIDs to the new
provider's aggregate.  This would seem to create a vendor lock for the
mapping provider.

|When a single device moves my personal opinion is that it should
|renumber (although there are ways to make that unnecessary) ...
|especially because LISP EIDs are not used as pure node identifiers, and
|I would expect some other mechanism such as HIP to provide node
|authentication e.g. for session continuity.
|
|Make sense?

That makes sense to me, but I got the distinct impression that there would
be some disagreement from others.

Tony

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg