On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Noel Chiappa <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Alia Atlas <[email protected]> > > > the question is whether the same bitpattern must belong to the same > > site and end-host. > > I would tend to say 'yes' - but I'm sure some bright spark will find a use > for having that not be true!
Useful or not - that is not possible with what is currently specified. > > I'm not happy about separate namespaces not being separate (e.g. > > independently allocatable) without that being clearly written down. > > What is written down is that they are separate name-spaces. > > I think that's more of a goal, or perhaps more accurately a gross > simplification made for the sake of a clear, simple explanation, than a > strict statement of fact. (If nothing else, they aren't independently > allocated.) > > So maybe the wording could use some clarification - as long as we don't > make it harder to understand for the average network engineer out there > (especially bearing in mind what Bob Dobbs said about average people...) I strongly think it needs clarification; Joel's text is a good start. Certainly, starting from the natural assumption about two namespaces being completely independent, it was "clear" that there were problems as specified. Alia _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
