Need to think about it. The active mapping use cases are more lenient than the
conditions in the draft. Vehicles roam between cellular providers and P5G
hotspots to save on data plan ($1/GB!!).
RTR RLOCs may change or remain, client EIDs change once in a while but for
privacy not so much for ro
Sounds good. But I didn't realize your use-case application needed
predictive-RLOCs. So I assume you have a requirement to do RLOC handoffs faster
than the mapping system. True?
Dino
> On Sep 5, 2022, at 7:08 PM, Sharon Barkai wrote:
>
> I agree.
>
> Mobility, Anonymity, Predictive, AAA, VPN
I would like to request WG last call on this document.
Dino
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org
> Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-00.txt
> Date: September 6, 2022 at 4:31:12 AM PDT
> To:
> Cc: lisp@ietf.org
> Reply-To: internet-dra...@ietf.org, lisp@
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol WG of the IETF.
Title : LISP Distinguished Name Encoding
Author : Dino Farinacci
Filename: draft-ietf-lisp-
