[RRG] Use class E for LISP locators?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

We've had some discussions about the virtues of being able to  
recognize locators and identifiers regardless of their context in a  
LISP-like solution. With IPv6, there is more than enough address  
space to have separate parts of the address space set aside for  
locators and for identifiers. With IPv4, we don't have the luxury of  
abundant address space. However, a fairly large set of addresses that  
is currently unused and will not be usable by many end-points for  
some time to come is the class E address space.

Would it make sense to use those 268 million addresses as locators?  
Presumably, updating routers that would need to route them wouldn't  
be too huge an issue as the number of vendors that build these  
routers is limited and the routers in question are highly managed.

As this is greenfield address space, it would also be possible to  
consider non-provider based aggregation here, which could fit well  
with a proposal like CRIO.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg