> As for the implementations… more than the number of implementations what > really matters is the deployments.
If this truly matters … > In the lack of these conditions the only reasonable action IMO is to use a > different type value. … then you made a contradiction. You don't want to change the type at all to respect the implementations. So that means lisp-geo stays the same and you either (1) ignore RFC 8060 or (2) change type in RFC 8060, should be our action. That is the simpliest solution without more disruption. Dino _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
