> That's not really what I had in mind. RFC6280 has considerations that apply
> do the design of protocols that can transfer location objects, not just their
> use or implementation. My question was whether the working group had
> considered whether they apply to this document. I'm not saying that they do;
> I am not an expert on lisp, and maybe the this data doesn't get sent or used
> in a way that matters from the perspective of RFC 6280. But I would hope that
> the working group has or will make an informed decision about that.
We, the LISP WG, had not look at RFC6280 considerations. But the
draft-farinacci-lisp-geo-01.txt draft is the use-case document for the LCAF
type. Since this draft has not been made into a working group draft we have
more time to look into this, if it becomes a working group draft.
Any comments chairs?
lisp mailing list