[lisp] Alia Atlas' No Objection on charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: (with COMMENT)
"Alia Atlas" <akatlas@gmail.com> Thu, 17 March 2016 16:15 UTC
Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51E1712D9DD; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.17.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160317161552.25264.12280.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:15:52 -0700
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/BiGFLBXKQ3ELLy0ffn313izJ9Vw>
Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org
Subject: [lisp] Alia Atlas' No Objection on charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:15:52 -0000
Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lisp/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Jari's concerns about clarity for what is on Standards Track and what is intended for Experimental. I also have some concerns about the "The scope of the LISP technology is recognized to range from unicast and multicast overlays at Layer 2 as well as at Layer 3, including NAT traversal, VPNs, and supporting mobility as a general feature, independently of whether it is a mobile user or a migrating Virtual Machine (VM), hence being applicable in both Data Centers and public Internet environments." as that seems to basically claim that LISP is recognized and intended to solve all those problems in a Standards track way - even when there are already clear and deployed standardized ways to do so. I'd prefer to change "recognized" to "potentially applicable" or at a minimum "recognized to potentially range"