On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org> 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.org mailing lists by 2012-11-27. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
> This is a direction to IANA to allocate a /16 IPv6 prefix for use
> with the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). The prefix will be
> used for local intra-domain routing and global endpoint
> identification, by sites deploying LISP as EID (Endpoint IDentifier)
> addressing space.
Mmm... In section 5 it states:
The working group reached consensus on an initial allocation of a /16
prefix out of a /12 block which is asked to remain reserved for
future use as EID space. The reason of such consensus is manifold:
So it is not asking just a /16 but also asking for reservation of a /12.
Pretty big space.
And in the list of reasons, I mainly read that it is "sufficiently large",
but not much about why it needs to be this big. Why would a smaller
allocation not be sufficient?
Bert