Hello, I am fine with the latest text proposed by Dino. Just a small question, should that “must” be actually a “MUST” as for RFC2119??
ciao Luigi > On 02 May 2016, at 23:29, Vina Ermagan (vermagan) <[email protected]> wrote: > > This seems fine to me, including the changes suggested by Joel. We¹ll > change the text in DDT to 32 bits for IID and referencing LCAF for more > details, in the next revision. > > Best, > Vina > > On 5/2/16, 10:10 AM, "lisp on behalf of Dino Farinacci" > <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> On May 2, 2016, at 1:36 AM, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 29 Apr 2016, at 23:18, Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> So how about this as a proposal. The DDT doc refers to 32-bits for the >>>> control-plane and RFC 6830 refers to 24-bits in the data-plane and the >>>> LCAF document explains how to map the 32 into 24 and what the benefit >>>> is? >>>> >>>> So I¹m asking and offering to update the LCAF document to reflect >>>> this. Agree? >>>> >>> >>> Sounds good to me. I just would like to see a ref to LCAF in the DDT >>> document, so that we have a pointer toward were the 32 to 24 bits >>> conversion is described. >> >> How about this change? Please ack DDT authors and then supply a reference >> to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-13. >> >> Once I get an ack, I¹ll submit this post-last-call draft update. >> >> Dino >> > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
