> Hi, > >>> How are you going to allocate space to ISPs? >> >> This is PI space. The registries will take portions of this space to >> allocate to end devices. > > Are you thinking about the existing RIRs here? If so: it might be a good idea > to notify them that this is coming.
Nothing is coming. Nothing really needs to change. But if there is anything written up to define allocation procedures, the RIRs can review such a document. The main motivation for this prefix is to optimize ITRs so they know that a destination is in a LISP site. This COULD eliminate a mapping database lookup for a destination not in this range. Meaning, if a packet is destined to a non-EID, you may know this by inspecting the address rather than asking the mapping system. >> This draft is purely a draft to REQUEST space. There will need to be a >> deployment guide on how to allocate EIDs, in general. > > And if the RIR system is used every RIR will develop its own policy for > allocating EIDs independently (hopefully based on the recommendations in such > a deployment guide). It will have to be very clear whose responsibility it is > to allocate from this space, and when assigning responsibility it might be a > good idea to make sure they accept that responsibility too. Right. > Note that I am not opposing the idea. I'm just trying to make sure this > address space doesn't disappear into a black hole because nobody takes the > responsibility to manage it. > > One thing we have to be very careful with here is that EIDs are not directly > allocated/assigned to end sites from this block. That will cause everyone to > independently find (different) PITRs for their space, Why not? > which will make a mess of the global IPv6 routing table... And why do you think you need to assign PITRs per sub-block? Dino > > Thanks, > Sander > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
