IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: issue 8: final text

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@nexthop.com> Thu, 17 October 2002 21:41 UTC

Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA26972 for <idr-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:41:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 0BFA5912D7; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:29 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: idr-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id C542E912D8; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:28 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: idr@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B591B912D7 for <idr@trapdoor.merit.edu>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 985C55DDC9; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:27 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: idr@merit.edu
Received: from presque.djinesys.com (dns.nexthop.com [64.211.218.216]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02B55DD95 for <idr@merit.edu>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from root@localhost) by presque.djinesys.com (8.11.3/8.11.1) id g9HLhJm10960; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhaas@jhaas.nexthop.com)
Received: from jhaas.nexthop.com (jhaas.nexthop.com [64.211.218.31]) by presque.djinesys.com (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g9HLhFC10953; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:15 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhaas@jhaas.nexthop.com)
Received: (from jhaas@localhost) by jhaas.nexthop.com (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id g9HLhFP22519; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:15 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:43:15 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@nexthop.com>
To: andrewl@xix-w.bengi.exodus.net
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, idr@merit.edu
Subject: Re: issue 8: final text
Message-ID: <20021017174315.X19953@nexthop.com>
References: <200210171322.g9HDMVm99249@merlot.juniper.net> <20021017101821.B19138@nexthop.com> <20021017143519.M20015@demiurge.exodus.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20021017143519.M20015@demiurge.exodus.net>; from andrewl@xix-w.bengi.exodus.net on Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:35:19PM -0700
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:35:19PM -0700, andrewl@xix-w.bengi.exodus.net wrote:
> Wouldn't this be the same as implementing the timers seperately with the
> same values?  I would argue that it a vendor wishes to do so they may,
> but it doesn't affect interoperabilty or the text Yakov posted.  The
> different values in the text are only "suggested defaults" so there is
> room of implementations to choose different default values.

The main reason I mentioned this was the fact that the lack of
implemented complex path aggregation was reason enough to call for
its removal from the spec.  If we're going to have this requirement,
this is another spot where its at issue.

In any case, I don't disagree with your assessment. :-)

> Andrew

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status