Note - so that this is not misconstrued as an unqualified endorsement, I still believe LISP has to tackle a number of issues including the tunnel MTU situation, per my message on 3/9/08:
http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg00692.html Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] >-----Original Message----- >From: Templin, Fred L >Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 9:52 AM >To: Routing Research Group Mailing List >Cc: Christian Vogt; Darrel Lewis (darlewis); [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >Vince Fuller >Subject: [RRG] on draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block-00.txt > >This draft follows from the comments I made at the mike >during Christian Vogt's presentation on 3/14 and also >here on the list: > >http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg00780.html >http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg00781.html > >The idea is that if a sufficiently large IPv6 prefix >is reserved for use as EID space, then a simple >transition is possible since it can be known whether >an EID resides behind an ETR simply by examining the >prefix. (Plus, the legacy IPv6 deployments never have >to renumber.) > >My comment to the draft authors is that the request >for a /16 may be overly conservative; why not ask for >something more like a /8, /10, etc. (or even more) to >reduce fragmentation of the IPv6 address space. > >To Christian Vogt, my comments did not show up on your >meeting minutes, which is understandable because you >were presenting at the time. Maybe update the minutes >if you get a chance. > >Thanks - Fred >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >-- >to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the >word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. >archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg > -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
