Looking at this revision, there seems to be one small aspect missing.
As part of the revision taht led to WG adoption, the distinguished name
draft added text about how the names are distinguished in the VPN case,
and says that if it is not a VPN case, uses have to explain how name
collisions are avoid. Router name seems ripe for use in many contexts.
So I would expect this draft to indicate how the names for this use case
will avoid other uses?
Yours,
Joel
On 9/28/2022 10:47 PM, [email protected] wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
Title : LISP Transport for Policy Distribution
Authors : Michael Kowal
Marc Portoles Comeras
Amit Jain
Dino Farinacci
Filename : draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-03.txt
Pages : 8
Date : 2022-09-28
Abstract:
This document describes the use of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP) to encode and transport data models for the configuration of
LISP ITRs.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution/
There is also an htmlized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-03
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-03
Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
