Ok, so I typed too soon... On 8/30/12 9:00 AM, Brian Haberman wrote:
All, As a part of the publication process, I have completed my initial review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block. The draft is well-written and concise and I thank you for that.The only suggestion I would make for this document is to drop the use of the 2119 language. It is only used in a few places and those uses are not really appropriate for 2119 language. I would suggest re-writing those guidelines with normal prose and drop the 2119 boilerplate from the document.
This draft would benefit from the addition of enhanced text on why a /16 is needed. What prefix lengths are expected to be allocated to end-sites? How many networks are expected to participate in this experiment? Should there be a termination date for this allocation?
To get an idea of what IANA is expecting as far as supporting information for this type of allocation, I suggest a review of the IANA IPv6 Special Purpose Address Registry.
http://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xml Regards, Brian _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
