Hi Luigi,
As I wrote in a recent message:
Misnamed WGs, e.g. LISP != Loc/ID Split
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg70176.html
HIP, which is a Locator-Identifier Separation protocol, dates from
2003, 8 years ago. However, HIP goes back to draft-moskowitz-hip-00 of
May 2009. I should have mentioned GSE, which is also a Loc-ID
Separation protocol. GSE goes back at least to March 1997:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipngwg-esd-analysis-00
Four months later - 14 years ago - the next version had the title:
Separating Identifiers and Locators in Addresses:
An Analysis of the GSE Proposal for IPv6
GSE and HIP are both Locator-Identifier Separation protocols. LISP is
not, since it operates on totally different principles.
In referring to LISP as "the loc/ID separation protocol", as you did:
Like Jari and others I do not see the name as disrespectful and it is
unrealistic to believe that the loc/ID separation protocol can be
renamed. It has been around for more than 5 years it is just too late.
it seems that you are both asserting and assuming that LISP is not only
a Loc/ID Separation protocol, but "*the* Loc/ID Separation protocol".
It was mistake to think of LISP as a Loc/ID Separation protocol.
Asserting that it is - or behaving as if it is - does not alter the fact
that it is not.
I can't imagine why "LISP" as the name for an Internet protocol should
be regarded as homage to the programming language. Is there any
evidence that this was the intention in late 2006 or early 2007?
- Robin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf