IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Forces-protocol] RE: GET/SET in one msg ?

Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com> Wed, 20 October 2004 14:34 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA09744 for <forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:34:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CKHkQ-0001wl-9s for forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:47:31 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CKGlp-000736-To; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:44:53 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CKGCX-0004sH-JS for forces-protocol@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:08:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA00810 for <forces-protocol@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:08:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from znx208-2-156-007.znyx.com ([208.2.156.7] helo=lotus.znyx.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CKGOr-00009L-8J for forces-protocol@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:21:10 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([208.2.156.2]) by lotus.znyx.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.11) with ESMTP id 2004102006104372:34398 ; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 06:10:43 -0700
Subject: Re: [Forces-protocol] RE: GET/SET in one msg ?
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jhalpern@MEGISTO.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20041020070534.0240c390@mail.megisto.com>
References: <468F3FDA28AA87429AD807992E22D07E025791E5@orsmsx408> <002d01c4b50b$1ecc9c10$020aa8c0@wwm1> <1098102734.1042.134.camel@jzny.localdomain> <013101c4b51d$a50761e0$020aa8c0@wwm1> <1098134060.1077.446.camel@jzny.localdomain> <5.1.0.14.0.20041019093826.0232d418@mail.megisto.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20041020070534.0240c390@mail.megisto.com>
Organization: ZNYX Networks
Message-Id: <1098277687.2072.9.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:08:07 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/20/2004 06:10:44 AM, Serialize by Router on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/20/2004 06:10:52 AM, Serialize complete at 10/20/2004 06:10:52 AM
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com>, ram.gopal@nokia.com, "Yang, Lily L" <lily.l.yang@intel.com>, forces-protocol@ietf.org, Alan DeKok <alan.dekok@idt.com>, zsolt@nc.rr.com, "Steven Blake (petri-meat)" <slblake@petri-meat.com>, Ellen M Deleganes <ellen.m.deleganes@intel.com>, "Wang, Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>
X-BeenThere: forces-protocol@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: hadi@znyx.com
List-Id: forces-protocol <forces-protocol.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/forces-protocol>
List-Post: <mailto:forces-protocol@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 07:08, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Allow me to be a bit pedantic and repetitive please, because apparently my 
> main point got lost.
> 
> Even when there are large numbers of LFB instances of a given class in an 
> FE that need to be set, I have trouble envisioning that they will need to 
> be set to the identical values.  Some of the values will be the same.  But 
> some will be different.

In anglais:
"route add 10.0.0.0/24 gw 10.0.0.50 on port 10 of FE2";

Consider my case where I have six routing table instances (not VR)
(typically one per MAC) which i would typically want to in most cases 
to populate with the same value (and on rare occasions with different
values).
Note the above makes sense for multi-FE multicast as well but you dont
seem to have issues with that.

cheers,
jamal


_______________________________________________
Forces-protocol mailing list
Forces-protocol@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email