Isidor, On 2/6/15 10:19 AM, Isidoros Kouvelas (kouvelas) wrote: > Brian, > > I am not sure what the minimum length of 5 could correspond to given > the minimum length of an IPv4 address will be 8 octets (including two > for AFI, one for the internal length field and one for the mask > length). So I would be interested in the discussion context you refer > to.
It turns out that the discussion during review was with the upper limit. I can't find any reference to discussions on the lower limit. Authors? > > Regarding the unspecified address specification I think that making > it explicit (zero length) would be cleaner than encoding a special > address. To limit the number of changes to the MIB we could only fix > the LispAddressType octet string definition as well as > lispEidRegistrationLastRegisterSenderLength. > > Regarding the example below, the normal case is that all EID prefixes > are configured on the Map-Server and then registered by the xTRs. > Reporting the MS as the RegisterSender of the EID prefixes that have > not been registered would not work. So, is your suggestion to change the lower limit on the TC and the lower limit for just the lispEidRegistrationLastRegisterSenderLength? I would still like some input from others in the WG on this issue. Regards, Brian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
