Thanks for your answer. If there are more than one of the same LCAF type
addresses, how are then the locators sorted? For instance two different
ELP locators.
May be it could be interesting to have sorting information for each LCAF
type, at least for the ones that could be used as locators.
Best regards
Albert
On 30/09/14 18:27, Dino Farinacci wrote:
I had already thought of that. I'll take action item to do it.
Dino
On Sep 30, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Joel M. Halpern<[email protected]> wrote:
Is this be written down somewhere? Should it be? (In the LCAF spec maybe?)
Yours,
Joel
On 9/30/14, 11:54 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Sorted based on AFI. Which means LCAF/Type when multiple LCAF encodings occur.
So if an locator-set had these addresses, they would be sorted in the following
order:
AFI=1, <ipv4-address>
AFI=2, <ipv6-address>
AFI=16387, LCAF-type=5, <geo-coordinates>
AFI=16387, LCAF-type=10, <elp>
Dino
On Sep 30, 2014, at 8:50 AM, Albert López<[email protected]> wrote:
Dear all,
We have seen that, according to RFC 6830, the locators appearing in a Map Reply must be
"sorted in order of ascending IP address where an IPv4 locator address is considered
numerically 'less than' an IPv6 locator address". How should the locators be sorted
if we also have LCAF addresses like ELP?
Best regards
Albert
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
--
Albert López
CCABA System Administrator
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
Telf: 93 4017182
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
