> From: John Curran <[email protected]>
> If it is documented that 'EID-only' addresses are not intended to be
> traditionally routed, that might help significantly in limiting
> concerns about potential impact to existing operations
Well, I'm clearly OK with it; does anyone else have a problem with this?
I think we definitely don't want it to be 'another avenue for getting normal
PI space', and so we should put that usage off-limits.
> The degree of rigor put into "how" we manage the proposed EID block is
> likely going to vary widely
> ...
> should LISP be as successful as hoped 10 years from now, then this
> "experiment" will be the production approach to managing the EID block.
> ..
> if there is any reason not to take the time to fully plan out the
> management approach as the initial _production_ solution (not
> experimental), then it has not been expressed on the mailing list.
> ...
> Since we are actually establishing the management approach for the
> identifier space of the future Internet, the task should be scoped
> accordingly
I'm not sure I agree that that's reasonable. To me, it's like asking Paul
Mockapetris to design the ICANN/IANA/RIR structure when he was doing DNS.
I know _I'm_ not equipped to design the business/etc framework you're to a
degree talking of.
Noel
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
