Hi,
I'm new on the list - I'll just jump in, I suppose. I'm working on a couple of
R&D projects on drone communications, where most participants tend to invent a
different wheel from people here. Part of my being here is trying to bridge
that gap a bit.
I largely like the RFC 6115 definition,
Hi,
On Monday, March 7th, 2022 at 12:14, Antoine FRESSANCOURT
antoine.fressanco...@huawei.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Reading the ISP-MN draft, it seems to me that EIDs are identifiers, not
> locators, even if they take the form of IPvX addresses (By the way, this is a
> perfect example of the L
Hi,
--- Original Message ---
On Monday, March 7th, 2022 at 14:00, Antoine FRESSANCOURT
wrote:
> [AFT] 3GPP provides a method to address this. Indeed, it allows bridging with
> other link layer technologies, termed “Non-3GPP access networks”. Wi-Fi for
> instance is seen as such a non
Dino,
thank you for this and your other answers!
I can see that it's possible to treat EIDs as sufficiently static to treat them
as (stand-ins for) unique identifiers.
I can still (quite easily) construct scenarios with drones where the
EID-to-RLOC mapping on a LISP map server is not going to
Hi Roland!
(And greetings to my former hometown, Karlsruhe!)
On Tuesday, March 8th, 2022 at 12:21, Bless, Roland (TM) roland.bl...@kit.edu
wrote:
> I'm not sure about your requirements. I think that identifiers for AAA
>
> can be unique and static on their "layer" and do not need to coincide
Hi all,
since I found myself contributing to the draft, it should be obvious that I'm
interested in continuing.
I think the proposed steps make a lot of sense. It should be fairly obvious
that the distinction between identifiers and locators alone helps distinguish
between what and how, but th
