Subject: [Rps] Latest RPSLng draft

From: "Larry J. Blunk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:22:05 -0500

I've attached the latest draft of the RPSLng spec.  I've left the
afi definition section as it was previously as I don't think there
was consensus to change the meaning of ipv4 and ipv6 to include
both unicast and multicast.   Please let me know if there are any
strong feelings about this.   One option could be to add ipv4.any
and ipv6.any types as a shorthand for ipv4.unicast,ipv4.multicast and
ipv6.unicast,ipv6.multicast.  However, I'm not sure if this doesn't
actually make things worse by creating more clutter in the spec.

   I've reduced the encapsulation types for the tunnel option in
the interface: attribute to just GRE and IPinIP.  IPinIP was
deemed sufficient since you already know the address types
of the encapsulating end-points.  DVMRP was dropped since the
protocol/encapsulation method seems to be deprecated at this point.
Should we add other encapsulation methods to this attribute?  For
example, LT2P, PPTP, or IPSec?   Would it be useful to have an
afi specification to indentify/restrict the address family types
carried across the tunnel?

 -Larry Blunk
  Merit

---

From: "Larry J. Blunk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:22:05 -0500

-Larry Blunk
  Merit