Earlier, Heiner Hummel wrote: > draft-rja-ilnp-intro-03, Section 1, Page 4, says in part: > % The high-order 64-bits of the IPv6 address become the Locator. > % The Locator indicates the subnetwork point of attachment for > % a node. In essence, the Locator names a subnetwork. Locators > % are also known as Routing Prefixes. > > Yes, this was all that I had found before asking my question. > Now Tony tells me, it is simply the IPv6 address space.
Tony's response is fine, if slightly imprecise, but apparently his comment was made with respect to ILNPv6 rather than in general. (I mean "imprecise" above in that an IPv6 Address is a 128-bit object that includes a 64-bit routing prefix; meanwhile an ILNPv6 Locator is a 64-bit object that is a 64-bit routing prefix). For ILNPv4, Locators are formed from IPv4 routing prefixes. While the engineering of ILNPv4 and ILNPv6 are necessarily different (in order to be backwards compatible with IPv4 and IPv6 respectively), the ILNP architecture is identical. > What is here any better/different from LISP-2 ? > > I am confused. This sounds like Karl Valentin. > Though the left spotlight (IPv4) on a stage was down, > he tried to repair the right one (IPv6). Opinions vary on whether ILNPv6 will be widely deployed. Opinions vary on whether ILNPv4 will be widely deployed. ILNP is an architecture, that can be applied to a range of networking protocols. As an example, one could also apply the ILNP architecture to OSI CLNP. I've taken an action to more clearly describe how ILNP could be applied to IPv4 in my in-process editing of draft-rja-ilnp-intro. I hope that will clarify any confusion. Yours, Ran _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
