On 8 Jan. 2013, at 07:03 , Terry Manderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Workgroup and others, > > Donning the brightly coloured LISP Chair hat. > > The document draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-03.txt was handed back to the > Workgroup and the document editors following the IETF last call. The LC > prompted interesting feedback and highlighted some issues. > > The Responsible AD and the LISP chairs have discussed the future of this > document. We believe that the future of this document could be best served > by splitting it in two (one that allocates/justifies the prefix, and one > that describes the LISP specific allocation mechanism) and also altering > text to address the concerns raised during the IETF LC. May I dare to ask why? Doesn't make more sense to have everything in one single document? Is not that I am against, is just that I want to understand what is the specific gain the WG will have by splitting the document. > > However, before the WG starts to rework the document, I would first like to > canvass the LISP WG as to your opinions. > > 1) Should we, as a WG, continue to work on this item? Is it necessary/useful > for LISP? I still think that having a reserved prefix can be useful. > > 2) If so, what direction should the WG take this document so that the LISP > experiment is best served? If the WG provide consensus on working on the document the main task IMO is to document the allocation mechanism. Luigi > > I'd also like to call on those folks (as Brian did) who offered review of > this document (CC'd here) during the IETF last call to participate on the > LISP mailing list as to its future. > > Cheers > Terry > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
