[RRG] on draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block-00.txt

["Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>]

This draft follows from the comments I made at the mike
during Christian Vogt's presentation on 3/14 and also
here on the list:

http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg00780.html
http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg00781.html

The idea is that if a sufficiently large IPv6 prefix
is reserved for use as EID space, then a simple
transition is possible since it can be known whether
an EID resides behind an ETR simply by examining the
prefix. (Plus, the legacy IPv6 deployments never have
to renumber.)

My comment to the draft authors is that the request
for a /16 may be overly conservative; why not ask for
something more like a /8, /10, etc. (or even more) to
reduce fragmentation of the IPv6 address space.

To Christian Vogt, my comments did not show up on your
meeting minutes, which is understandable because you
were presenting at the time. Maybe update the minutes
if you get a chance.

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com  

  


--
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