Eduard Metz wrote on 07/10/2021 10:03:
For my understanding, apart from that the (definition of) SID may not be aligned with the literal text in below RFCs, what is the real problem?
the concept of an ipv6 destination address is deeply ingrained in the ipv6 protocol. So, looking at this from a deployment point of view, why does an expediency of the sort suggested in this draft justify changing the semantics of one of the cornerstones of the ipv6 protocol?
The authors would need to justify this protocol modification on the same sort of basis that any other ID might be expected to do. E.g. for starters, including an analysis of how this would impact or potentially impact any other RFC which references or implicitly depends on currently-defined ipv6 addressing semantics.
Nick _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
