Hi Luigi, > > please see below. > >> Am 12.09.2018 um 09:30 schrieb Luigi Iannone <[email protected]>: >> >> Hi, >> >> two quick comments inline. >> >> >>> On 11 Sep 2018, at 20:13, Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> 3) Given the following statement: >>>> "Note that while this document assumes a LISP-ALT database mapping >>>> infrastructure to illustrate certain aspects of Map-Server and Map- >>>> Resolver operation..." >>>> it seems that RFC6836 should be a normative reference, as it might not be >>>> possible to understand all details explained in this doc with knowing ALT. >>> >>> I would like the lisp-chairs and/or Deborah to comment on this. >>> >> >> IMO We can completely delete that sentence. The documents does a pretty good >> job to talk in general terms about the mapping system and the use of its >> front-end Map-Servers/Map-Resolvers. >> >> In the few cases where something specific to ALT and DDT can be said the >> document actually does it. > > Actually I brought this up because there were more cases where I found that > ALT knowledge is needed. If you don’t want this to be a normative reference > and remove the sentence above (which I’m not sure is helpful), please also > double-check all other occurrences of ALT and make sure the discussed case is > also understandable without ALT knowledge.
I think it should left in and we should add LISP-DDT to the paragraph. Since the two mapping transport systems that have moved forward to RFC are ALT and DDT. And I believe they should both be Normative References. > >> >> >> >>>> 4) Further I would also think that I-D.ietf-lisp-mn and >>>> I-D.ietf-lisp-pubsub >>>> should be normative references as the meaning of the respective bits it not >>>> further specified in this doc. Or can these bits just be ignored if >>>> I-D.ietf-lisp-mn and I-D.ietf-lisp-pubsub are not implemented? If so that >>>> should be stated. >>> >>> I would like the lisp-chairs and/or Deborah to comment on this. >>> >> >> Those bits can be ignored if an implementer choses not to support those >> mechanisms. >> Hence, the documents do not really need to be normative. > > Okay, that these bits can be ignored should be stated in the doc! I will add text for this. Dino > > Mirja > > > >> >> Ciao >> >> L. >> >> > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
