On 8/25/15 12:07 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote: > Folks, > > so far only Dino replied to this thread. Should we understand that people are > not interested in moving LISP to ST?
I very much support moving LISP to ST, sorry for the delay in replying. Regards, -Lori > > L. > > >> On 10 Aug 2015, at 00:02, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> As suggested by Terry Manderson during the last meeting, it is time for the >> WG >> to think to move away from the Internet Scalability issue and focus on the >> core >> protocol technology. >> >> LISP has its merits, concerning routing scalability, proved by experimental >> work >> documented in the various RFC and drafts that the WG has produced so far. >> That work remains untouched. Yet, LISP provides advantages and benefits >> in contexts for which it has not been originally designed. >> >> 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. >> >> If the WG decides to go that way, this will give the opportunity to re-work >> the core set of RFCs defining LISP, avoiding any reference to scalability, >> and possibly enhancing the documents with the experience gathered so far. >> >> Would be the WG in favour of such direction? >> >> Joel & Luigi > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
