I think a thorough understanding of mobility requirements and dependencies and how LISP may or may not accommodate these scenarios is key. I would like to see us work on this and other mobility related drafts (e.g. Ground based LISP).
Victor > On Sep 18, 2019, at 11:18 AM, Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’m a side author on this document and more of a reviewer. But I’ll answer > your questions on behalf of a WG member. > >> Before I get more privacy feedback (if I do) I want to know >> 1) does the WG actually care about this? > > I do. Because understanding in deep detail the use-cases, allows us to > understand if LISP has the necessary protocol features. > >> 2) Is it ready for more extensive review? > > Yes. > >> I realize we have not adopted this document. Some of this feedback is to >> help the chairs judge what to do when the authors do ask for adoption. > > We are at a point of the protocol’s life where working on use-cases allows > more adoption. I am for making this a working group document (even though the > authors have not formally requested). > > Dino > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
