IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lisp-impact-02

Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> Thu, 04 June 2015 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <rcallon@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD9F21A88C4 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 08:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DVhZYDYCRdS7 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 08:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0133.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 950D71A890B for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 08:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.107.152) by BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.107.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.172.22; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 15:22:34 +0000
Received: from BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.107.152]) by BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.107.152]) with mapi id 15.01.0172.012; Thu, 4 Jun 2015 15:22:34 +0000
From: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [lisp] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lisp-impact-02
Thread-Index: AQHQmgu7Z9e6Ul6hM0e5dxjOHTDbvp2XwQAwgAKwDQCAAR0/0IAAS7MAgAArDICAAHXbAIAAAkMggAACiwCAAABfEA==
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:22:34 +0000
Message-ID: <BY1PR0501MB14302B111DC1565340BFDA56A5B30@BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <96CCC975-4D04-46F4-ABA9-D5BF6A77C451@gigix.net> <1F6A3E9B-62E7-4B5D-99F3-2DE6AC0FB13F@gigix.net> <BY1PR0501MB14301C95C338B693B870DCEBA5B60@BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <199AEC90-B132-4493-BB7D-E3088093F222@gigix.net> <BY1PR0501MB143061359489A70478CFC14FA5B30@BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <82E787F8-1BD1-4F2F-A286-227873019288@gmail.com> <1D2F1DE4-A8F4-4998-8BBE-7307AAD1467D@gigix.net> <54754D2F-C2F6-4CA3-BC61-EE0F8A8CF446@gmail.com> <BY1PR0501MB14307EBCD2711B365EAAD618A5B30@BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <DFDEF8F7-B2D4-4F47-9FC1-FE56AED003F7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <DFDEF8F7-B2D4-4F47-9FC1-FE56AED003F7@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1430;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY1PR0501MB143063474D75AA22DA9CAF08A5B30@BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(520003)(3002001); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1430; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1430;
x-forefront-prvs: 0597911EE1
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(164054003)(189002)(13464003)(377454003)(24454002)(51704005)(199003)(2656002)(54356999)(230783001)(86362001)(77156002)(19580395003)(122556002)(50986999)(76176999)(62966003)(40100003)(101416001)(33656002)(87936001)(66066001)(74316001)(64706001)(92566002)(102836002)(76576001)(5002640100001)(189998001)(106116001)(110136002)(68736005)(5001830100001)(5001960100002)(99286002)(46102003)(81156007)(1411001)(19580405001)(105586002)(2900100001)(106356001)(93886004)(4001540100001)(97736004)(2950100001)(5001860100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1430; H:BY1PR0501MB1430.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Jun 2015 15:22:34.4639 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1430
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/zhZ4akMFNA5PmvKqnkA5eAj-dhk>
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lisp-impact-02
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 04 Jun 2015 15:22:38 -0000

Yup. "RLOC reachability mechanisms" sounds like the right term in this case. 

Thanks, Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:farinacci@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 11:20 AM
To: Ross Callon
Cc: Luigi Iannone; LISP mailing list list
Subject: Re: [lisp] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lisp-impact-02



> On Jun 4, 2015, at 8:16 AM, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Thus it seems fine to me to replace “OAM” with “RLOC reachability” in the proposed text.

As written it is a noun. I indicated "RLOC reachability mechanisms". 

Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email