Terry, > John, > > The draft is a LISP control message data format document, it is not > specifying the precise behaviors of l2/l3vpn over LISP. It enables those > workgroups to have or work on solutions (should they so choose) that can be > transported by LISP. There is no mandatory statements here to say they must. > Just as the document describes a geo location (s4.4) LISP is the common > denominator here. I do not see any value in splitting this one document into > numerous different documents housed in many different workgroups.
Specifying encoding/format without specifying semantics is not going to produce multi-vendor interoperable implementations. Moreover, doing this would allow a vendor to label their solution as "based on IETF standards", effectively creating an end run to the IETF process. Given that, the WG should not accept the draft, as it defines a whole bunch of code points without any companion document that defines semantics of these code points. Yakov. _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
