Subject: RE: [RRG] Renumbering...

From: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:21:20 -0700

|> That's confusing at best...  While you may be allocating them from  
|> the same
|> number pool, an EID prefix is *not* the same as a PI address.  In
|
|No, that is confusing. From a LISP architecture point of view  
|*whatever addresses are assigned at the site are EID-prefixes*, period.

I'm very sorry that you're confused.  However, for us to communicate
effectively, we need to be a bit more precise in our use of language.  Yes,
you are welcome to have legacy addresses at a site and to reuse the same
code points in an EID namespace.  I think that we all understand that's how
you want LISP to operate.  

However, that does not make addresses and EIDs equivalent and
interchangeable.  They are still two separate namespaces.  For example, at
some point, I would hope that people will be able to get an EID-prefix and
have that part of an EID aggregate.  That should never be injected as a
global unaggregated prefix down into underlying routing.

Similarly, I would hope that at some point, people who request a classical
PI address are instead redirected to get an identifier, such as an
aggregateable EID prefix and directed to use our solution, such as LISP
instead.

Tony

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg