I can well believe that is useful.
It would help you you provided use case?
Yours,
Joel
On 9/19/17 10:34 PM, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal wrote:
Hi all,
We would like to suggest updating rfc6833bis [1] to include the xTR-ID
in the Map-Request, in the same way that is already defined for the
Map-Register.
In particular, we propose to update the Map-Request message format in
page 10 to include an I-bit right next to the m-bit (i.e. the I-bit
would be in position 11). We suggest the following text to be included
in page 11, after the explanation of the m-bit:
“I: This is the xTR-ID bit. When this bit is set, a 128-bit xTR-ID field
followed by a 64-bit Site-ID field are appended to the end of the
Map-Request, immediately following the last EID-Record (or the Map-Reply
Record, if present).”
Let us know what you think.
Thanks,
Alberto
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-05
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
