Hi Dino, > On 27 Apr 2024, at 00:19, Dino Farinacci <farina...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think this is what transpired. > > (1) we wrote lisp-geo with exact packet syntax as RFC 8060. > (2) We received comments from Enke, Naiming, Chris Hopps, and Acee. > (3) We changed the format to be consistent with OSPF, ISIS, and BGP (the > lisp-geo Document Change section documents this and when). > (4) I asked if we could change RFC 8060 and pretty sure Luigi said yes.
I do not recall any of this. I remember agreeing on changing the format. I admit I did not pay attention to the code point (most probably assuming that it will be different). But I will check my email archive to see if there is anything related or that may suggest otherwise I will share it on the mailing list. Ciao L. > > That’s my memory. > > Dino > >> On Apr 26, 2024, at 6:07 PM, Joel Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com> wrote: >> >> It's up to Luigi and Padma, but my read is that if it was private it was >> not a WG decision. >> >> Yours, >> >> Joel >> >> On 4/26/2024 6:05 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote: >>>> Can you find an on-list email where such a conclusion was reached. That >>>> would certainly explain your choice. >>> I searched (before I sent the last email) and could not find anything. >>> Likely it was private. >>> >>> Dino _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
