Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the same address = separate namespa...
Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Wed, 25 March 2009 23:31 UTC
Return-Path: <hartmans@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0639928C171 for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.942
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.942 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.505, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WKveHoV+iCNs for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (unknown [130.129.87.223]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E19928C24B for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 572B8414C; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:32:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: HeinerHummel@aol.com
References: <c9e.4a4f53ae.36fbe0e4@aol.com>
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:32:15 -0400
In-Reply-To: <c9e.4a4f53ae.36fbe0e4@aol.com> (HeinerHummel@aol.com's message of "Wed\, 25 Mar 2009 15\:32\:52 EDT")
Message-ID: <tsl63hx9o1s.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: rw@firstpr.com.au, lisp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the same address = separate namespa...
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:31:23 -0000
What do you mean that no EID is also an RLOC? It's not clear to me that in interworking cases this is always true.
- Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the sam… HeinerHummel
- Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the sam… Sam Hartman
- Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the sam… Robin Whittle
- Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the sam… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Consensus? EID and RLOC use of the sam… Robin Whittle