Thanks for sending me a few documents to read :-)

I'm starting with an easy one. This document is ready to move forward, I found no technical issues but I did find a few editorial issues. I have sent the draft forward to an IETF last call.

Technical:

None

Editorial:

Section 1 gives the usual RFC 2119 terminology, but I don't actually see why this draft would need to use these terms. This is an explanation of a tool that is based on Lisp protocols defined in other documents, right? Please delete section 1.

Also, please reformulate the definition of term "EID" so that it does not use the RFC 2119 keywords; a definition seems like the wrong place to use such keywords, and in case, the normative rules about the EIDs should probably only exist in one of the Lisp documents.

ITR, ETR, PA addresses, xTR

These terms are not defined in this document. Please add them and possibly other missing terms to the terminology section (or just expand them on first use and refer to a document that defines them).

Sending Map-Requests to Map Resolvers provides a secure
mechanism mechanism to obtain a Map-Reply containing the
authoritative EID-to-RLOC mapping for a destination LISP site.
s/mechanism mechanism/mechanism/

an EMR is a Map-Request message
which is encapsulated with another LISP header using UDP
destination port number 4341

Please refer to the Lisp header specification and the one that defines port 4341.

The cisco LISP prototype implementation has support for lig for IPv4

s/cisco/Cisco/g (I think)

     titanium-simlo# lig self6
     Send loopback map-request to 10.0.0.1 for 192:168:1:: ...
     Received map-reply from 10::1 with rtt 0.044372 secs

     Map-cache entry for EID 192:168:1:::
     192:168:1::/48, uptime: 00:00:01, expires: 23:59:58
                        via map-reply, self
       Locator          Uptime    State  Priority/Weight  Packets In/Out
       10.0.0.3         00:00:01  up     1/100            0/0
       10::1            00:00:01  up     2/0              0/0

What are the 192:168:1 etc addresses? Would it be better to use the IPv6 example address space for these examples?

Jari

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to