On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Dino Farinacci wrote:We have a new LISP-02 draft available. The packet formats are consistent with CONS-01 as well as the implementation we are testing.
The draft has been submitted to the ID directory, but you can find a draft at:
http://www.dinof.net/~dino/ietf/draft-farinacci-lisp-02.txt
This version is formatted much better. ;-)
This draft also reflects comments from Ved Kafle and Olivier Bonaventure.
a few more general question/clearification around the draft in general just to see if I understood it correct. Also fun to read those small comments on Steve Jobs and iPhone :)
Thanks!
In section 3, you mentio about EID: " The source EID is obtained via existing mechanisms used to set a hosts "local" IP address. LISP uses PI blocks for EIDs; such EIDs MUST NOT be used as LISP RLOCs. Note that EID blocks may be assigned in a hierarchical manner,"
Why restrict it to PI addresses there? If, because no one know how it is moving on, ULA-C/G are approved and getting into use, they would be almost perfect for this usage.
Next thing, EID-prefix, that would be the above mention IP block?
Yes.
Also in Section 4.1 (page 9-10), the example was worded so it could be read that it is Ipv4 only. I know thats not true but maybe change the wording a bit? A change like this could be enough:
"This section provides an example of a IPv4 unicast packet flow with the following parameters:"
Dino
_______________________________________________ RAM mailing list RAM at iab.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram