Hi Alvaro,
se comments inline. > On 15 Feb 2016, at 23:40, Alvaro Retana <aret...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-12: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This document is clearly requesting the assignment of LISP EID space for > an experiment. Why is it not an Experimental document? [I may have > missed the discussion in the archive.] > As I replied for the management document, certainly we can go for experimental. > Along the same lines, the conditions for the experiment to be successful > and the IETF to consider whether to transform the prefix into a permanent > assignment (Section 6. 3+3 Allocation Plan) are not defined. How should > this decision be made? How will the IETF know the experiment is > successful? > This is normal IETF process. LISP WG has to discuss whether or not a permanent allocation is needed. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > An early allocation was made in October/2015. The values should be > included in the document. Right. The allocation has been granted after the -12 has been published. We will include the values in the -13 version. > > The dates mentioned assumed a start date of December/2015, but the > document isn't getting approved until now — is there a need to change the > dates? Just wondering — part of it is that I'm not sure if RIPE has > already started allocating addresses or not. > We can easily shift all the timing to start at 2016. > Please expand ROA and put in a reference. > > Thanks. Will do. ciao L. _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
