lisp Discussion Archive - Date Index
[Prev Page] [Next Page] [Thread Index]
[IETF Mailing List Directory]
[lisp List Information]
- May 23 2011
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
John Scudder
- Re: [lisp] An operational problem,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
John Scudder
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- [lisp] LISP and IPv6,
Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- [lisp] ETR connectivity to site - question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Robin Whittle
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-lig-02,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] An operational problem,
Terry Manderson
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-lig-02,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Overclaiming side effect,
Stephen Farrell
- Re: [lisp] Overclaiming side effect,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Overclaiming side effect,
Stephen Farrell
- Re: [lisp] Overclaiming side effect,
Dino Farinacci
- May 21 2011
- May 21 2011
- May 20 2011
- [lisp] An operational problem,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-*,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] EID Address space,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Alia Atlas
- [lisp] EID Address space,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] Security Considerations,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] Indirect last call comment,
Dino Farinacci
- [lisp] advertising shorter EID prefix,
Yakov Rekhter
- [lisp] Indirect last call comment,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] typo in draft-ietf-lisp-ms-08.txt,
Vince Fuller
- [lisp] typo in draft-ietf-lisp-ms-08.txt,
Mathieu Peresse
- [lisp] Security Considerations,
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Robin Whittle
- [lisp] question on EID reachability (section 6.4),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Noel Chiappa
- May 19 2011
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Ravi Bhagavatula
- Re: [lisp] Last call for draft-ietf-lisp-12,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] Last call for draft-ietf-lisp-12,
Ronald Bonica
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Vince Fuller
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Ravi Bhagavatula
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Ravi Bhagavatula
- Re: [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Uma Devi Bandaru
- [lisp] Questions on Map-Resolver operation,
Ravi Bhagavatula
- May 17 2011
- May 16 2011
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-*,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-*,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-alt-06,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-ms-08,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-interwork-01,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-multicast-05,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-lig-02,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-map-versioning-01,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] Last call for draft-ietf-lisp-12,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
John Scudder
- May 13 2011
- May 12 2011
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Alia Atlas
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
John Zwiebel
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Uma Devi Bandaru
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Darrel Lewis
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Uma Devi Bandaru
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
John Zwiebel
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Uma Devi Bandaru
- Re: [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Noel Chiappa
- [lisp] MS/MR message specs,
Uma Devi Bandaru
- May 07 2011
- May 07 2011
- May 06 2011
- May 04 2011
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- May 03 2011
- May 02 2011
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-*,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-*,
John Scudder
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-ms-08,
Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-jakab-lisp-deployment-03,
Joel Halpern
- [lisp] Last call for draft-ietf-lisp-12,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-ms-08,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-alt-06,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-interwork-01,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-multicast-05,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-lig-02,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] last call for draft-ietf-lisp-map-versioning-01,
Terry Manderson
- May 01 2011
- Apr 29 2011
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #54: ITR failures and implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #70: Client not respecting RLOC weights (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #70: Client not respecting RLOC weights (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #107: "Weight" in Map-Reply Message Format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #107: "Weight" in Map-Reply Message Format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #95: On eliminating vs. deferring mapping lookup (comment 15 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #95: On eliminating vs. deferring mapping lookup (comment 15 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #87: On reusing globally routed address block as EID-prefix (comment 11 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #58: LISP breaking RPF and used as anonymization service (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #58: LISP breaking RPF and used as anonymization service (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #33: Editorial Issues Section 7 of draft-ietf-lisp-06.txt,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #33: Editorial Issues Section 7 of draft-ietf-lisp-06.txt,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] New Issue: security text in the document,
Terry Manderson
- Apr 28 2011
- Apr 26 2011
- Apr 25 2011
- Apr 22 2011
- Apr 21 2011
- Apr 20 2011
- Apr 19 2011
- Apr 18 2011
- Apr 17 2011
- Apr 15 2011
- Re: [lisp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-jaka- draft-jakab-lisp-deployment-03,
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Erik Nordmark
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Erik Nordmark
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Amit Jain
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Amit Jain
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Amit Jain
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Isidor Kouvelas
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Isidor Kouvelas
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Damien Saucez
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Gregg Schudel
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Gregg Schudel
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Gregg Schudel
- Re: [lisp] #66: Strict RLOC ordering causing problems on mapping changes,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #66: Strict RLOC ordering causing problems on mapping changes,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #56: ETR unreachability (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #56: ETR unreachability (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #56: ETR unreachability (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Florin Coras
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Florin Coras
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Florin Coras
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Loránd Jakab
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Loránd Jakab
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Lori Jakab
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Job Snijders
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Job Snijders
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Job Snijders
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Victor Moreno (vimoreno)
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Victor Moreno (vimoreno)
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Victor Moreno (vimoreno)
- Re: [lisp] #110: "Mapping Protocol Data" in Map-Reply Message Format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #110: "Mapping Protocol Data" in Map-Reply Message Format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #111: Semantics of LSB,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #111: Semantics of LSB,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #63: On the use of anycast addresses for RLOCs (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #63: On the use of anycast addresses for RLOCs (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #15: chairs to review normative and informative references,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Dino Farinacci
- [lisp] Adoption of draft-saucez-lisp-security as a WG item,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] Adoption of draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block as a WG item,
Terry Manderson
- [lisp] Adoption of draft-maino-lisp-sec as a WG item,
Terry Manderson
- Apr 11 2011
- Apr 08 2011
- Re: [lisp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-jakab-lisp-deployment-03,
Joel M. Halpern
- [lisp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-jakab-lisp-deployment-03,
LorÃnd Jakab
- Re: [lisp] #25: Map Server to ETR security has no automated key management,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #71: Missing description mechanism to make EID-to-RLOC (from D. Papadimitriou's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #109: "Locator" in Map-reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #106: Unassigned values in Map-Reply messages (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #104: Impact of slashdotting ETR (comment 21 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #103: Mapping Protocol Data (comment 20 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #99: Confusion in Section 5.4.1 (comment 18 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #98: LISP nonce (comment 17 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #97: MTU concerns (comment 16 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #96: Confidence in informal Survey (comment 16 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #94: Implications on using Control plane for data forwarding (comment 15 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #89: On redefining the name of the encapsulated packet header (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #86: On the design goals and requirements (comment 10 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #84: Renumbering burden when clients change providers (comment 9 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #80: Router Performances,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #69: Inadequate solution for ETR overclaims (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #68: What is the source address for a negative reply, which has a zero length locator -set ? (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #57: How to determine EIDs not forwardable on the routable topology (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #51: Returning same locator-set for a given EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #50: MAP-Replies content that MUST be invariant (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #49: "MAP-Replies" content that is allowed to change (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #45: LISP vs. Existing (from Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #13: Use of Zero UDP Checksums (in IPv4 and IPv6) Requires Analysis,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #4: LISP errors,
lisp issue tracker
- Apr 05 2011
- Apr 04 2011
- Apr 01 2011
- Mar 31 2011
- Mar 30 2011
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] #55: ETR failure and its implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Noel Chiappa
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] Versioning, I don't think we need to disable source versioning when we have no destination version.,
Damien Saucez
- [lisp] Versioning, I don't think we need to disable source versioning when we have no destination version.,
Jesper Skriver
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #15: chairs to review normative and informative references,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #48: MAP-Replies returning different contents for a given EID (review by Y, Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #48: MAP-Replies returning different contents for a given EID (review by Y, Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #47: Ambiguity on "MAP-replies" requirements (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #47: Ambiguity on "MAP-replies" requirements (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #25: Map Server to ETR security has no automated key management,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #113: inbound traffic engineering support with LISP,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #113: inbound traffic engineering support with LISP,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #112: use of re-encapsulation is underspecified,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #115: claims in Section 7,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #104: Impact of slashdotting ETR (comment 21 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #93: VPN (comment 14 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #93: VPN (comment 14 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #91: Data probe (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #91: Data probe (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #90: Restricting re-encapsulation (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #90: Restricting re-encapsulation (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #88: "Proxy device" description (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #88: "Proxy device" description (comment 12 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #85: Mobility without address changing (comment 9 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #85: Mobility without address changing (comment 9 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #84: Renumbering burden when clients change providers (comment 9 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #83: Wording in Abstract (comment 8 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #83: Wording in Abstract (comment 8 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #82: Wording in Abstract (comment 8 and 44 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #82: Wording in Abstract (comment 8 and 44 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #80: Router Performances,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #79: Editorial Issues (from J. Arkko's mail),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #78: Missing things (from J. Arkko's mail),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #78: Missing things (from J. Arkko's mail),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #77: On the use of key-chaining for re-keying,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #77: On the use of key-chaining for re-keying,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #23: inner source RLOC undefined in some cases,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #23: inner source RLOC undefined in some cases,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #76: Implication of using anycast addresses for Map-servers,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #76: Implication of using anycast addresses for Map-servers,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #21: Section 5.1 behavior,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #21: Section 5.1 behavior,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #22: An ETR MUST consume UDP port 4342 packets not addressed to it,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #22: An ETR MUST consume UDP port 4342 packets not addressed to it,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #45: LISP vs. Existing (from Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Mar 29 2011
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Noel Chiappa
- [lisp] I-D Action:draft-ietf-lisp-11.txt,
Internet-Drafts
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #108: "R" bit in Map-Reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] Subject: Re: #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Aditya Chopra
- Re: [lisp] #106: Unassigned values in Map-Reply messages (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #69: Inadequate solution for ETR overclaims (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #55: ETR failure and its implications on connectivity restoration time (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #97: MTU concerns (comment 16 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #96: Confidence in informal Survey (comment 16 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #51: Returning same locator-set for a given EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #86: On the design goals and requirements (comment 10 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #50: MAP-Replies content that MUST be invariant (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #49: "MAP-Replies" content that is allowed to change (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #68: What is the source address for a negative reply, which has a zero length locator -set ? (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #57: How to determine EIDs not forwardable on the routable topology (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #4: LISP errors,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #109: "Locator" in Map-reply message format (comment 22 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #103: Mapping Protocol Data (comment 20 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #99: Confusion in Section 5.4.1 (comment 18 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #98: LISP nonce (comment 17 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #75: Security of Map-Register message.,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #3: lisp-ms security mechanism between ITR and map resolver,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Yakov Rekhter
- [lisp] Minor updates to drat-ietf-lisp-11.txt,
Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] #114: EID-to-RLOC mapping - transients,
Dino Farinacci
- Mar 28 2011
- Mar 27 2011
- Mar 26 2011
- Mar 22 2011
- Mar 21 2011
- Mar 18 2011
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Fabio Maino
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Vince Fuller
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Vince Fuller
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Sam Hartman
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Sam Hartman
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Vince Fuller
- Re: [lisp] #27: ETR may claim a larger prefix than is delegated to it,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #66: Strict RLOC ordering causing problems on mapping changes,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp #113 (new): inbound traffic engineering support with LISP,
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp #48 (reopened): MAP-Replies returning different contents for a given EID (review by Y, Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #23: inner source RLOC undefined in some cases,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #76: Implication of using anycast addresses for Map-servers,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #79: Editorial Issues (from J. Arkko's mail),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #78: Missing things (from J. Arkko's mail),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #77: On the use of key-chaining for re-keying,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #75: Security of Map-Register message.,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #25: Map Server to ETR security has no automated key management,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #3: lisp-ms security mechanism between ITR and map resolver,
lisp issue tracker
- Mar 17 2011
- Re: [lisp] #44: LISP vs existing (reported by Yakov Rekhter),
Robert Raszuk
- Re: [lisp] #44: LISP vs existing (reported by Yakov Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #53: Reachability between ETR and EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] #53: Reachability between ETR and EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #44: LISP vs existing (reported by Yakov Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #45: LISP vs. Existing (from Y. Rekhter),
Yakov Rekhter
- Re: [lisp] #101: Filtering ICMP messages (comment 19 reported by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #44: LISP vs existing (reported by Yakov Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #45: LISP vs. Existing (from Y. Rekhter),
Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [lisp] #111: Semantics of LSB,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #44: LISP vs existing (reported by Yakov Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #45: LISP vs. Existing (from Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #46: Cache Thrashing (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #53: Reachability between ETR and EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
Eliot Lear
- Re: [lisp] #53: Reachability between ETR and EID (review by Y. Rekhter),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #57: How to determine EIDs not forwardable on the routable topology (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #66: Strict RLOC ordering causing problems on mapping changes,
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #70: Client not respecting RLOC weights (from Y. Rekhter's review),
lisp issue tracker
- Re: [lisp] #73: Tunnel liveness (from R. Bonica review for the RTG directorate),
lisp issue tracker
Mail converted by MHonArc
