Terry,
> Yakov,
>
> On 3/12/11 1:54 AM, "Yakov Rekhter" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol and any items
> >> which directly impact LISP including any base protocol changes required to
> >> enable VPN and mobile topologies (precise operational definitions of
> >> these topologies should be left for IETF WGs focused on these technologies
).
> >
> > With respect to chartering LISP WG to work on the LISP "base protocol
> > changes required to enable VPN", if these changes have to do with
> > enabling L2 VPNs, then such work should be done in L2VPN WG. If
> > these changes have to do with enabling L3 VPN, then such work should
> > be done in L3VPN WG. In both of these cases the outcome of this work
> > could be reviewed by the LISP WG.
> >
>
> I understand your point, however that doesn't seem to align with current
> IETF practice. I am perfectly comfortable to see the definition of
> operational aspects and any other work done which doesn't change the base
> spec handled by other work groups that specialize in such areas (VPN or
> mobility). This is what I discussed with the ADs. If a change is required in
> the LISP fields, packet structure, mapping system or other substrate defined
> here to enable those WGs to take up such work items - then those changes
> should occur here.
Ok.
> This modus operandi is the same as having IDR fix the AS0 definition, or
> allow BGP to carry larger payloads, for BGPSEC instead of having SIDR do it
> - and potentially getting it wrong.
>
> > The same should apply to work on enaling "mobile topoligies".
> >
> > With this in mind I propose to replace the above sentence with the
> > following:
> >
> > The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol and any items
> > which directly impact LISP and are related to using LISP for improving
> > Internet routing scalability.
> >
>
> How about:
>
> The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol and any items
> which directly impact LISP protocol structures or are related to using LISP
> for improving Internet routing scalability.
>
How about:
The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol and any
items which directly impact LISP protocol structures and are related
to using LISP for improving Internet routing scalability.
In addition, if work done by some other IETF WG requires changes
in the LISP base protocol or any items which directly impact LISP
protocol structures, then the LISP WG is chartered to work on such
changes.
The second paragraph is to reflect the point you made above, namely:
I am perfectly comfortable to see the definition of
operational aspects and any other work done which doesn't change the base
spec handled by other work groups that specialize in such areas (VPN or
mobility). This is what I discussed with the ADs. If a change is required in
the LISP fields, packet structure, mapping system or other substrate defined
here to enable those WGs to take up such work items - then those changes
should occur here.
Yakov.
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
