Subject: [Pidloc] Encoding Routing in FAST

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:55:50 -0500

Hi all,

Tom Herbert published a draft

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbert-route-fast-00

which describes a solution by which the client (mobile node) can send its
locator to the sender.

Tom defined the locator encoding for ILA and the network seems to be
specific to ILA.
However I believe this design can be generalized to other IdLoc protocols
or at least the locator encoding could be reused..

Basically this draft represents a solution (ILA based) for the locator
sharing cases mentioned in Erik's draft.

Any comments?

Behcet

---

From: Tom Herbert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 10:20:05 -0700

> or at least the locator encoding could be reused..

Hi Behcet,

Thanks for posting and making connection.

Yes, ILA is an example. Tickets can contain other types of locators or
information.

> sharing cases mentioned in Erik's draft.

It might be a little different in that regard. FAST could encode locator
for return path in a ticket. Peer just reflects ticket and doesn't know
about locator, it's used to route packets in destination provider network.
So locators aren't actually being shared, they're transparently carried by
third parties.

Actual sharing could be done, for instance a locator as the ingress point
in a network might ambiguous enough to avoid privacy concerns. A ticket
might just contain locator (and network overlay method). In this case peers
would need to parse tickets, so the might go down path of a standardized
ticket format.

Tom

> Any comments?
>
> Behcet
> --
> Pidloc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pidloc
>

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:30:05 -0500

Hi Tom,

> about locator, it's used to route packets in destination provider network.

You mean source routing?

Is this somehow related to SRv6?

> would need to parse tickets, so the might go down path of a standardized
I don't quite understand these things well, I need to dig more into it.
What I understood from you draft is that it is a UDP application, i.e. it
is application layer solution, is this correct?

Behcet

---

From: Tom Herbert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 08:14:07 -0700

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 7:30 AM Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
wrote:

>>> which describes a solution by which the client (mobile node) can send
>>> its locator to the sender.
>>>
>>> However I believe this design can be generalized to other IdLoc
>>> protocols or at least the locator encoding could be reused..
>>>
>>
>> Hi Behcet,
>>

It can be used as type of source routing, but it's more generic. The
ability to specify routing and services in return path is critical.

> Is this somehow related to SRv6?

Not really. SRv6 SIDs could be encoded in a ticket in a compressed form is
possible.

>
>
>
>> So locators aren't actually being shared, they're transparently carried
>> by third parties.
>>

No, it uses IPv6 Hop-by-Hop options. No encapsulation required.

Tom