>> The Map-Request registry can point to both 9301 and the new LISP PubSub RFC. > > That works, yes. > > I was wondering about the fact that the message itself just grew an extra 2 > fields.
It shouldn’t have. Which fields are you referring to? If you are referring to site-ID and xTR-ID, those are existing fields in the Map-Register message (and not the Mal-Request message). Dino
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
