Wendy, all, I just read draft draft-roome-alto-unified-props-00 and liked it a lot. It is very well written, as Wendy always does, and I recommend that many of you read this design.
Personally, I see this design as a good candidate as a WG item. Before making up my mind, I see benefits in discussing two high level design decisions: 1. Hierarchy of general domains. In the current design, this issue already appears in the ipv4 and ipv6 domains. The approach that the draft adopts is longest prefix matching (LPM); see Section 3.1.3.. This can be considered as smallest containing set, if we see each CIDR as a set, and such sets form a directed acyclic graph. Q: Does it make sense for the document to go as far as defining this general principle, instead of the specific LPM? 2. Consistency of the same property across domains. Section 3.2.4 gives one example of such a case. Q: Is this a specific decision for two specific domains, or the general principle is no across domain consistency? Cheers, Richard -
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
