I didn't say you said tunnel. I was stating for clarity, since people think LISP does tunnels (because we have terminlogy that implies it, ex. Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR)). Tunnels, from the original introduction of them were virtual/logical point-point interfaces in a router/switch implementation. We like to think that LISP has "dynamic encapsulation". Its kinda marketing terminlogy, but there is no long-term logical interface state stored per RLOC in the map-cache.
Dino > On Feb 28, 2022, at 9:46 AM, Toerless Eckert <t...@cs.fau.de> wrote: > > Hey wait. I didn't even say tunnel at all ;-) > > I just said you can unfortunately not claim to be an Internet ISP and > not carry the whole bloody BGP routing table by just using LISP > (unfortunately). > > Aka: Joe touch pointed out that something like LISP (on-demand routing > information > if thats an appropriate classification in our context here) is part of overall > routing architecture (which i wholeheartedly agree), but its alas not a > sufficient > option to become an Internet ISP, and so i argued its not part of the > "Internet Architecture" > as it is reelevant to this doc. > > Cheers > Toerless > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 03:10:47PM -0800, Dino Farinacci wrote: >>> Is LISP really part of the Internet Architecture ? I thought (unfortunately) >>> not. E.g.: i don't think i can become an Internet transit ISP without >>> participating >>> in the "native" BGP routing. "Hey, i don't want these gigantic BGP Internet >>> routing tables, and my customers don't need it. I just want do do LISP". >> >> LISP isn't really tunnels (if you look really really closely) but to quote >> Noel "Tunnels were never first class citizens of the Internet architecture". >> Take it for what's it worth. >> >> Dino _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
