> It would be worth for the WG to consider dropping the scalability aspects,
> focus on the overlay technology itself, and possibly move the work
> on standard track. 

Could we use different wording rather than “dropping the scalability aspects”. 
I know you mean to core routing table scalability items. But we don’t want to 
convey in the charter that for the various overlay use-cases LISP can provide 
that it won’t scale. That is “scale of the protocol” and “having the protocol 
solve the Internet scalability problem” are two different and orthongonal items.

And I think LISP should continue to scale the Internet, it just should not be 
the only or main focus of what LISP can provide.

Dino

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

Reply via email to