I support focusing on the overlay technology and associated use cases,
and move the work to standard track.
Fabio
On 8/25/15 2:07 AM, 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?
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
