Subject: [rrg] HIP, Hip-Proxy etc. (Strategy B)

From: Robin Whittle <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:45:58 +1100

I am hoping to draw the HIP discussion from the "Rejecting all but
Strategy A" thread into this thread with an appropriate title.

No-one has proposed HIP or anything related to HIP as an actual
solution to the routing scaling problem.  However, I understand we
are discussing how HIP might be used for this purpose, in which case
I think it would match, perhaps not exactly, Bill's Strategy B:

  http://bill.herrin.us/network/rrgarchitectures.html

The HIP RFCs and an overview are:

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5201  Main
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5202  EPS
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5203  Registration extension
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5204  Rendezvous extension
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5205  DNS extension
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5206  End-Host Mobility & Multihoming
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5207  NAT and Firewall Traversal

  http://infrahip.hiit.fi/index.php?index=how

There were several HIP related messages on 5 January.  Here I list
the most recent ones, from Pekka Nikander, Thomas Henderson, Scott
Brim and Fred Templin:

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000741.html  PN

  "HIP-Proxy" as as a version of "HIP mobile router":
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-melen-hip-mr-01

  Two additional designs:

    1. LISP xTR-xTR protocol is replaced with the HIP protocol
       (providing the additional mobility and security
       features HIP provides).

    2. One where the initial xTR->xTR opening message is a hybrid
       that indicates that the sender understands both LISP and HIP,
       allowing the receiver to pick which one to use.

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000742.html  PN

  Advantages and disadvantages of above approach(es).

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000743.html  PN

  Discussion with Dino on how the above approach(es) might
  compare with (or be combined with?) LISP.

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000745.html  TH

  Distinctions between "xTR" (I think this means LISP and other
  core-edge separation solutions) and HIP / HIP-proxy.

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000746.html  TH

  Pointer to slides describing Boeing's experience with HIP to
  provide secure Layer 2 VPN over untrusted wireless network -
  for instance in the airliner factory.
  http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/08nov/slides/HIPRG-0.pdf

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000747.html  SB

  "Mapping" in HIP?  Potential problems with pushing path selection
  (as an example) responsibility to hosts.

http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000748.html  FT

  HIP: HIT   = identity
       iRLOC = inner routing locator
       oRLOC = outer routing locator

  LISP (and perhaps others): EID  ~= iRLOC
                             RLOC ~= oRLOC

  - Robin

_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

---

From: Xu Xiaohu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:08:46 +0800

> I am hoping to draw the HIP discussion from the "Rejecting 
> all but Strategy A" thread into this thread with an appropriate title.
> 
> No-one has proposed HIP or anything related to HIP as an 
> actual solution to the routing scaling problem.  

Not ture. RANGI (http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/ietf/rangi.htm) ( its old
version is HRA )is actually an id/locator split proposal related to HIP.
Compared with HIP,  RANGI has many differences on the aspects of ID/locator
namespace structures, mapping system and routing system. 

Xiaohu

---

From: Robin Whittle <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 10:53:38 +1100

I am still hoping to draw discussion of HIP etc. out of the
"Rejecting all but Strategy A" thread into a thread with a relevant
subject line.  Here is a list of recent and older messages concerning
Lightweight HIP (LHIP):

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-heer-hip-lhip-00
  2007-08-05 Tobias Heer

  http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/08mar/slides/HIPRG-4.pdf
  2008-03    Tobias Heer

  Early reference in 2003-12, by Pekka Nikander:
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nikander-multi6-hip-00

In the last few days:

  http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000742.html      PN
  http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000755.html      DF
  http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000762.html      PN
  http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2009-January/000764.html      TH

Earlier:

  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ram/current/msg00298.html  PN
  2007-01-03

  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ram/current/msg00573.html  PN
  2007-02-15

  http://psg.com/lists/rrg/2007/msg00414.html      2007-10-09     PN
  http://psg.com/lists/rrg/2008/msg00806.html      2008-03-16     PN
  http://www.irtf.org/pipermail/rrg/2008-November/000338.html     PN

   - Robin