Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

I will post at noon GMT if there are no objections. Dino > On Mar 21, 2018, at 12:52 AM, Victor Moreno (vimoreno) > wrote: > > I think the new text is much better, unambiguous and addresses all concerns. > > Thanks Dino, > > -v > >> On Mar 21, 2018, at 12:29 AM, Dino

Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

I think the new text is much better, unambiguous and addresses all concerns. Thanks Dino, -v > On Mar 21, 2018, at 12:29 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote: > >> Could I not do the above even if the EID-prefix DID NOT EXIST? Or are we >> restricting any application of policy only

Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

> Could I not do the above even if the EID-prefix DID NOT EXIST? Or are we > restricting any application of policy only to LISP EID-prefixes, and not to > non-LISP prefixes? No, it would be either. > The map-replies suggested in the new text would effectively be NMRs, correct? > i.e.

Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

Thanks Dino, I want to make sure I understand correctly. A couple of questions: If the EID-prefix exists and there is a policy in the Map-Server to have the requestor drop packets for the matching EID-prefix, then a Drop/Policy-Denied action is

Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

> On Mar 19, 2018, at 6:22 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote: > >> Dear WG, >> >> I did a quick review of rfc6833bis-08. Some comments/suggestions > > Thanks Victor. See new update enclosed. Let us know if you are good with the > changes and the response below. > >> 1. Section

Re: [lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

These comments apply to version -09 of the document without any change. -v On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:18 PM, Victor Moreno (vimoreno) > wrote: Dear WG, I did a quick review of rfc6833bis-08. Some comments/suggestions 1. Section 5.8. Encapsulated

[lisp] Review 6833bis-08 - General and NMR

Dear WG, I did a quick review of rfc6833bis-08. Some comments/suggestions 1. Section 5.8. Encapsulated Control Message Format. There is a reference to LH, it is not spelled out anywhere. I assume this means Lisp Header. 2. Section 5.8. On page 27, there is a figure/header format showing the