Re: What's the good word?

[Anil Rijsinghani 15-May-1992 1353 <[e-mail]>]

    Fred,

    Thanks for the response - your use of the term "subsumption" was
    what I thought it meant; however it's not defined in any other
    RFC or draft that I have seen.  RFC-1058 (RIP-1) also used the
    term, but it referred to subsumption as a way of hiding subnet
    and host information from routers in other nets only in order
    not to break RIP-1.  The way it's used in RIP-2 is as an optimization
    rather than a restriction, but the wording almost seems to suggest
    that one subnet might be part of a larger one.  All I'm asking
    for is clarification; perhaps some of the text from your response
    could be put in the document.  As for RIP domains - the wording
    just doesn't make a lot of sense.  Why is it "necessary" to allow
    multiple instances of RIP on a single wire?

    On IP multicasting - you imply that this simply requires the
    translation between IP and hardware addresses for appropriate media,
    which sounds good to me.  (the only document I have on IP multicasting
    is RFC 1112, which says that if you want to send as well as receive
    multicast, then you MUST do IGMP)

    I would also suggest mentioning something about the MIB
    somewhere in the protocol document.  (since mandatory counters are
    defined there which will require additional processing)

    Anil