Padma Pillay-Esnault ( padma.ietf AT gmail.com )
Luigi Iannone ( ggx AT gigix.net )
SECRETARY: Alberto Rodriguez-Natal ( natal AT cisco.com )
Session 1/1 (60 Minutes)
Monday, 17 March, 2025
15:30 - 16:30 Bangkok (GMT+7), Session III, 60 Minutes
Room: Borophimarn 3
Vengada Prasad Govindan: Does this document belong to LISP WG, PIM WG or
MBONED WG?
Luigi Iannone: Since it is about LISP Multicast IMO it belongs to LISP
WG. This does not prevent to discuss the document in other working
groups and even make calls on more than one WG.
Stig Venaas: PIM WG can have some input on this document but we can
agree that it belongs in LISP WG.
Vengada Prasad Govindan: Why priority and weight are not used in
Map-Referral messages?
Luigi Iannone: DDT does not use multicast; hence multicast priority and
weight are not used. Unicast priority and weight could be used to do
load balancing among DDT nodes, however, this is not included in the
original design, and since we are just moving 8111 to standard track it
does not seem useful to add unexperienced mechanisms in the document.
Padma Pillay-Esnault: The document lacks a description to what to do in
case something goes wrong.
Luigi Iannone: Good point. Someting to work on.
Luigi Iannone: Authors ask for WG adoption.
Pool on adoption shows support in the room. To be taken to the list.
Padma Pillay-Esnault: The changes suggested in this new revision may
have an impact in backward compatibility. Maybe add a section describing
compatibility with early version of the document?
Luigi Iannone: That is true, some of the proposed changes are not
compatible, but needed for security reasons. Documenting possible
compatibility issues make sense and will be done.
Luigi Iannone: Authors ask for WG adoption.
Pool on adoption shows support in the room. To be taken to the list.
No time to present slides prepared by Alvaro Retana. Work plan and call
for adoption to be made on the list.