My non-discuss comments have been addressed. TY My discuss comments, augmented by my message on 2 June still stand as unaddressed by draft v18.
Deb On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 11:01 AM Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Deb, > > text has been added and we are now to revision -18: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lisp-geo-18 > > Can you check whether all of your concerns are addressed? > > Thanks > > L. > > On 13 Jun 2025, at 19:03, Deb Cooley <[email protected]> wrote: > > The text Luigi proposes ('this document....) is fine. TY. > > Deb > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 12:02 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> > 1. As for RFC2026: The "Experimental" designation typically denotes a >> specification that >> > is part of some research or development effort. >> > >> > This document is part of a development effort to include >> geo-coordinates in LISP. Is not part of an “experiment", as not all >> experimental RFC are necessarily part of an experiment. It is about the >> maturity level of the technology. >> >> If Deb is okay with this text, I will add to document. >> >> > 2. The history of LISP. >> > >> > Long story short, LISP was born as a big experiment and the WG >> chartered only to produce informational and experimental documents. With >> the deployment experience gathered through the years, the LISP WG has >> rechartered to move the most mature pieces of LISP to STD Track, but not >> all the pieces. >> >> This is informational for Deb. And I think everyone agrees something like >> this shouldn't go in this specific document. Otherwise it would need to go >> in every LISP document. Please ack or nak this Deb and other reviewers. >> >> Dino >> >> >
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
