Re: [OSPF] Anycast Extension to OSPFv3 draft-wang-aospf-00

Abhay,

Abhay D.S wrote:
> hi acee,
> Not very positive and encouraging, being on a WG chair.
I clearly stated I was speaking a WG member and have just
as much right as anyone else to state my opinion as to whether or
not a specific piece of work is accepted by the WG. If you have
technical comments related to the draft as opposed to critiques of
character, I'd encourage you to share them.

Thanks,
Acee

> It reminds me of  folks at the ATM forum in the past !!
> Thanks,
> Abhay
>
>
>
> Acee Lindem wrote:
>> Speaking as a WG Member and author of the RFC 2740 respin:
>>
>> My opinion is that the protocol extensions described in the draft
>> are completely unnecessary and the OSPFv3 (RFC 2740 and its
>> update) already can support anycast addresses as /128 prefixes.
>> One simply uses the lowest cost path. Note that the protocol
>> already support configuration of host routes as described in appendix
>> C.7.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>> Acee Lindem wrote:
>>> Speaking as WG Chair:
>>>
>>> I'd like to initiate discussion on this draft so that we can let the 
>>> authors
>>> know whether the WG wants to presue it furthers.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>>
>>> Yue Wang wrote:
>>>> This document describes AOSPF (Anycast Extensions to OSPFv3),
>>>>   a routing protocol which extends OSPFv3 to support anycast, which
>>>>   we implemented and tested successfully in our IPv6 test bed. And
>>>>   the performance analysis shows the overhead of AOSPF is low.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-aospf-00.txt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OSPF mailing list
>>> OSPF@ietf.org
>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSPF mailing list
>> OSPF@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf