Hi, On 8 Jan. 2013, at 11:34 , SM <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Terry, > At 22:03 07-01-2013, Terry Manderson wrote: >> 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? > > The work item seems useful. > >> 2) If so, what direction should the WG take this document so that the LISP >> experiment is best served? > > The problem is justifying the IP address space allocation and explaining how > it will be managed. > > My guess is that the working group took an ORCHID approach (copy and paste > :-)). Not really, truth is that it was suggested to look at ORCHID, hence we tried to provide the same elements (or equivalent) that the ORCHID document provided. > I suggest dropping the idea of calling it a very large-scale experiment. > The unstated problem is about politics. I suggest taking a look at > draft-lear-lisp-nerd-09. It contains a good discussion of operational models > and the trade-offs. > Thanks a lot, will do. ciao Luigi > Regards, > -sm > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
