Alvaro,

Yes, your suggested text would be fine with me.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 [email protected]


On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 10:31 AM Alvaro Retana <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On June 1, 2022 at 10:06:58 AM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>
> > > On 1 Jun 2022, at 15:46, Luigi Iannone wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alvaro,
> > >
> > >> On 1 Jun 2022, at 15:29, Alvaro Retana wrote:
> > >> Nice sentence, but what does it mean? What action should the
> > >> implementation take to satisfy "MUST be managed"? From Luigi's
> > >> initial response (above), it sounds like the time between changes (TTL
> > >> ?) has to be long enough... Please spell some of this out.
> > >>
> > >
> > > What if we change to:
> > >
> > > Mapping updates, and their corresponding Map Version Number MUST be
> managed
> > > so that a very old version number will not be confused as a new version
> > > number (because of the circular numbering space).
> > >
> >
> > Or may be:
> >
> > Mapping updates, and their corresponding Map Version Number MUST be
> managed
> > so that a very old version number will not be confused as a new version
> > number (because of the circular numbering space). To this end simple
> measures
> > can be taken, like Updating a mapping only when all active traffic is
> using
> > the latest version, or waiting sufficient time to be sure that mapping in
> > LISP caches expire, which means waiting at least as much as the mapping
> Time-
> > To-Live (as defined in 6833bis)
> >
> > Any preference?
>
> The normative text is what is not clear enough for me: "MUST be
> managed" is not actionable.  The examples help.  I would be fine if
> the normative language is removed while still mentioning that it is a
> requirement:
>
>   Mapping updates, and their corresponding Map Version Numbers have to be
>   managed so that a very old version number will not be confused as a new
>   version number (because of the circular numbering space). To this end...
>
>
> Donald: is this ok with you?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Alvaro.
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to