Dino, Back then Albert Lopez, Vina and others invested quite some time addressing in draft-ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal a lot of corner cases that were coming from mobiity.
Before we move forward with a NAT document we should make sure we either explicitly leave out those use cases, or address them. Thanks, Fabio On 3/21/23, 12:37 PM, "lisp on behalf of Dino Farinacci" <lisp-boun...@ietf.org <mailto:lisp-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of farina...@gmail.com <mailto:farina...@gmail.com>> wrote: draft-farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat proposes an implemented solution for the problem. Dino > On Mar 21, 2023, at 6:25 AM, Albert López <albert.lo...@upc.edu > <mailto:albert.lo...@upc.edu>> wrote: > > On 14/3/23 10:46, Luigi Iannone wrote: >> LISP NAT Traversal: we have a candidate document > > Here we have the problem of handovers between RTRs. Some time ago I proposed > a possible solution but I believe we need to think a little more to find a > more optimal solution. > Albert López > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org <mailto:lisp@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp> _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org <mailto:lisp@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp> _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
