RE: [bmwg] Convergence draft
"David Newman" <dnewman@networktest.com> Fri, 20 April 2001 20:32 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA17635 for <bmwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:32:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA00192; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:24:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA00167 for <bmwg@ns.ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from coppi.networktest.com ([209.187.11.98]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA17548 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:24:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from MONK (dhcp98.int.networktest.com [10.0.0.98]) by coppi.networktest.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA24562 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:25:51 -0400
From: David Newman <dnewman@networktest.com>
To: bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [bmwg] Convergence draft
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:23:54 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBJJFLLNKDDFGCGHPIKENPHGAA.dnewman@networktest.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-Reply-To: <p05001935b700c95c2e1d@[63.216.127.100]>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance: Normal
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> In the long term, we would like to introduce new tasks dealing with > BGP convergence in the presence of policy constraints, and on the > interactions of iBGP and AS-wide convergence. For now, these are > outside our scope, as is IGP convergence. > > Is there any sense in the working group that the terminology document > should contain any of these additional topics, or strictly be limited > to eBGP? Future revisions, of course, are always possible. > Mission creep is generally a bad thing. I'm ok with definitions of these other topics, PROVIDED they're germane to the topic at hand. dn _______________________________________________ bmwg mailing list bmwg@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
- [bmwg] Convergence draft Howard C. Berkowitz
- RE: [bmwg] Convergence draft David Newman