At 06:45 13-11-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
WG (lisp) to consider the following document:
- 'LISP EID Block'
<draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-03.txt> as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2012-11-27. Exceptionally, comments
may be
The document does not clearly define how the address space will be
managed. This might end up being problematic in future.
In Section 4:
"Too guarantee reachability from the Legacy Internet the prefix could"
There is a typo for "Too".
In Section 6:
"It is suggested to IANA to temporarily avoid allocating any
other address block the same /12 prefix the EID /16 prefix
belongs to. This is to accommodate future requests of EID
space without fragmenting the EID addressing space."
Shouldn't that be under IANA Considerations?
"If in the future there will be need for a larger EID Block the
address space adjacent the EID Block could be allocate by IANA
according to the current policies."
Which policies does the above refer to?
In Section 10:
"This document instructs the IANA to assign a /16 IPv6 prefix for use
as the global LISP EID space using a hierarchical allocation as
outlined in [RFC5226]."
Who will be the delegated managers?
"Following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], such space
will be assigned only upon IETF Review."
The previous sentence mentions hierarchical allocation and the above
sentence mentions IETF Review. It is not clear how assignments from
this space will be made.
Regards,
-sm