Hi everyone and thanks, Luigi for kicking off the subject. I just have
one suggestion below.
On 23.05.23 16:07, Luigi Iannone wrote:
So the question is: Should we (the WG) consider that priorities can be
used to indicate something different from priority?
If not: we may want to write it down somewhere.
If yes: Well…. This deserves a longer discussion (may be to be
included in the new charter…).
What has been discussed is maybe borrowing a values from the top of the
priority field that may attach other semantics (so think values
248-254). The lispers draft would be one such use.
Eliot
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
