[rrg] Please respond: Questions from the IESG as to whether a WG forming BOF is necessary for LISP

[Noel Chiappa]

    > From: Christian Vogt <christian.vogt at ericsson.com>

    > Portability of EID prefixes requires that the ALT topology follows
    > EID-addressing. This leads to potentially longer-than-optimal paths
    > along the ALT topology. Vice versa, if path stretch is to be limited,
    > then portability of EID prefixes must be restricted.

Yes, but this is only for the first packet(s), until the mapping gets back to
the ITR. Do you really think a few extra hops there are going to be a
problem? (Especially given that due to EGP/IGP information flow barriers,
paths probably aren't completely optimal anyway....)

Also, what percentage of DNS resolutions take more than one round-trip
(because of the use of multi-level DNS names)? Surely that's an even worse
delay (several round-trips, as opposed to simply a few extra hops), but I
don't think I've heard complaints about that?

        Noel