Re: [lisp] Standard Track

On 8/25/15 12:07 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> so far only Dino replied to this thread. Should we understand that people are not interested in moving LISP to ST?

I very much support moving LISP to ST, sorry for the delay in replying.

Regards,
-Lori

> 
> L.
> 
> 
>> On 10 Aug 2015, at 00:02, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As suggested by Terry Manderson during the last meeting, it is time for the WG 
>> to think to move away from the Internet Scalability issue and focus on the core
>> protocol technology. 
>>
>> LISP has its merits, concerning routing scalability, proved by experimental work 
>> documented in the various RFC and drafts that the WG has produced so far. 
>> That work remains untouched. Yet, LISP provides advantages and benefits 
>> in contexts for which it has not been originally designed.
>>
>> It would be worth for the WG to consider dropping the scalability aspects,
>> focus on the overlay technology itself, and possibly move the work
>> on standard track. 
>>
>> If the WG decides to go that way, this will give the opportunity to re-work 
>> the core set of RFCs defining LISP, avoiding any reference to scalability,
>> and possibly enhancing the documents with the experience gathered so far.
>>
>> Would be the WG in favour of such direction?
>>
>> Joel & Luigi
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> lisp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> 