> 
> Just addressing one aspect here that strikes me as being helpful to the 
> discussion.
> 
> On 7/2/15 12:06 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
> ...
>>> First, there is the question of direction for the basic LISP
>>> specification.  We can leave it as it is.  However, folks have
>>> asked us about moving it to Proposed Standard.  Based on our
>>> reading and discussion with relevant ADs, one path to do this would
>>> be to refocus the specification away from the core Internet scaling
>>> problems, and instead towards a scalable anxd flexible overlay
>>> technology.  This would not change the technical procedures, but
>>> would have significnat impact on the descriptive text.
>> 
>> This is fine but I am a bit worried we’ll spend time on “texting” and
>> not creating anything new. We are way overdue in progressing use-case
>> documents that people want to deploy, so I would like to make sure
>> one work item doesn’t gate others.
>> 
>> That is, I hope we can work in parallel. Where I do believe we WILL
>> NOT lose focus.
>> 
> 
> The re-focusing of of 6830 will probably be almost exclusive word-smithing.  
> The intention is not to change the protocol behaviors at all.  We will likely 
> remove text that is covered by the introduction and similarly remove text 
> about solving the core scaling problem.    (Yes, spending energy on wording 
> is annoying, unfortunate, and sometimes necessary.)

This is fine but one feature of an overlay is reducing routes in the core. So 
it is a feature that we’ll reduce routes in the core. If that is the same as 
solving “the core scaling problem”, is open for discussion. I agree the term 
“core scaling problem” is a very generic claim and very wide encompassing.

> Since it is about the wording, not about changing any formats or procedures, 
> I very much agree that this can and should go on in parallel with the work on 
> addressing the technical topics we want to see covered.

Agree.

Dino

> 
> Yours,
> Joel

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to