> While reviewing draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-12 I realized that if we want > instance-id support for other LCAF types then we must support recursive > LCAFs, i.e., use Type 2 and within it store the type we’re interested in. > Wouldn’t it be better to have the instance-id value and mask part of the LCAF > header? Apart from simplifying processing on xTR side, this would also help > avoid having other types, like Type 9, define their own instace-id fields.
Well Florin, the way I look at this is from this perspective. If we want geo-prefix support for all other LCAF types we also have to do nested LCAFs. So be all things to all people would make the encoding a combinatorial problem. So nesting is really the only way to manage it. I agree that instance-ID may be a popular LCAF to use but I see others that will be just as popular. To name two, AFI-List and RLE. Dino > > Thanks, > Florin > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
