Dino, On 3/5/18, 5:00 PM, "Dino Farinacci" <farina...@gmail.com> wrote: My comment about this spec is that you really don’t need a LCAF format to format the addresses. You can use AFI=2 and use IPv6 format. That will reduce the size. Using IPv6 format is something we considered while writing the draft. We went the LCAF route to have an explicit way to (1) distinguish ILA Identifiers/Locators from other addresses in the Mapping System, (2) specify the Identifier/Locator length and (3) include metadata bits. However, for simple scenarios (only ILA domain, no overlapping with non-local addresses, no multiple SIR prefixes, fixed Identifier length, no need for metadata bits, etc) things could work with AFI=2 format. If the rough consensus from the WG(s) is that a plain AFI=2 format is sufficient, we can certainly update the draft. I would like to know the opinion of others on this.
Alberto _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp