Re: Question re HIP dependency [Re: about Wedgelayer 3.5 / Fat IP approaches]
Jari Arkko <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.multi6 |
|---|---|
| Organization | None |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I did not realize we were already in the vote-for-the-solution stage. Anyway, I would be OK with the use of HIP as the solution (or as some component or upgrade path of another solution). I do agree with Iljitsch that a "light weight HIP" approach might be something to think about. I believe HIP with ESP replaced by a flow id (like in some of the other multi6 proposals?) should be doable. --Jari