> Of course for someone who knows LISP it is trivial that it is separated. The > issue is how to move forward and ensure that LISP control plane is not bound > at > all to a particular data-plane. Actually, since the beginning we say LISP is > map-and-encap so it means two components mapping and encapsulation, that seems > thus very logical to me to have to documents, one for "mapping", one for > “encapsulation”.
If the new charter allows to incorporate additional data-planes, then RFC6830bis could be structured to (1) indicate that multiple data-planes can be used and (2) how more we can decouple the data-plane from the control-plane. > At a first glance it could look like just being marketing but actually > splitting > would allow both planes to be developed (and updated) in parallel. There are pros and cons either way. Dino _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
