On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org> wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from the Locator/ID Separation Protocol > WG (lisp) to consider the following document: > - 'LISP EID Block' > <draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-03.txt> as Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-11-27. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This is a direction to IANA to allocate a /16 IPv6 prefix for use > with the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). The prefix will be > used for local intra-domain routing and global endpoint > identification, by sites deploying LISP as EID (Endpoint IDentifier) > addressing space. Mmm... In section 5 it states: The working group reached consensus on an initial allocation of a /16 prefix out of a /12 block which is asked to remain reserved for future use as EID space. The reason of such consensus is manifold: So it is not asking just a /16 but also asking for reservation of a /12. Pretty big space. And in the list of reasons, I mainly read that it is "sufficiently large", but not much about why it needs to be this big. Why would a smaller allocation not be sufficient? Bert