On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 10:18:03AM -0800, Tony Li <tony...@tony.li> wrote a message of 27 lines which said:
> Given the extent of the changes, it's appropriate that the RG review > and comment, with a full two week review cycle and consensus check. I've read the documents (except the IPv4-specific ones) and I believe they are mostly complete and clearly explain how ILNP works. There is just one thing which seems to be absent: I do not find clearly stated how are the identifier and locator stored in the IPv6 packet. From some paragraphs, I guess the locator use the high-order 64 bits of the IPv6 address and the identifier the low-order bits but I was not able to find it clearly written. Another point is more a detail: the documents seem to mandate that there is a state in the machine for every ILNP correspondent (the ILCC). This is no problem for a HTTP server (there is already the TCP state) but more problematic for active authoritative DNS servers: today, they are able to sustain a very high activity because they have absolutely zero state. May be the ILCC could be made optional for stateless servers? (There is no need to receive locator updates for the ultra-short transactions of the DNS.) Otherwise, there is a typo in the references, draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-noncev6 is written draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-nonce6 in the docs (no 'v'). _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
