Christian,
> The reason why LISP-related address allocation guidelines should be out
> of scope is because they could potentially lock operators into deploying
> LISP for reasons unrelated to routing scalability.
No, not really. First, operators are not going to be
"locked" into anything the IETF says or does if they
don't want to.
Second, RIRs operate on the consensus of their members,
of whom few attend the IETF or care what it does.
In any event, all the idea was about (at least to the
best of my understanding, it was Olivier's suggestion)
was provide some idea of what we thought would work (we
don't know), and to document what we've learned from the
ALT pilot deployment.
If consensus is to remove the item, that's fine with me.
Dave
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
