Subsumption rules omission
Jeffrey C Honig <jch@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu> Wed, 05 August 1992 18:29 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07665;
5 Aug 92 14:29 EDT
Received: from NRI.NRI.Reston.Va.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id ab07661;
5 Aug 92 14:29 EDT
Received: from atlas.xylogics.com by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23079;
5 Aug 92 14:28 EDT
Received: by atlas.xylogics.com id AA04910 (5.65c/UK-2.1-920725);
Wed, 5 Aug 1992 14:04:31 -0400
Received: from MITCHELL.CIT.CORNELL.EDU by atlas.xylogics.com with SMTP
id AA07204 (5.65c/UK-2.1-920725); Wed, 5 Aug 1992 14:02:52 -0400
Received: from MITCHELL.CIT.CORNELL.EDU by mitchell.cit.cornell.edu
(4.1/1.34/Honig-1.3) id AA22411; Wed, 5 Aug 92 06:57:14 EDT
Message-Id: <9208051057.AA22411@mitchell.cit.cornell.edu>
To: ietf-rip@xylogics.com
Subject: Subsumption rules omission
Organization: Information Technologies/Network Resources;
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
X-Mailer: MH [version 6.7] MH-E [version 3.7+] MH-E [version 3.7+] MH-E
[version 3.7+] MH-E [version 3.7+]
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 92 06:57:14 -0400
From: Jeffrey C Honig <jch@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu>
Under the subsumption rules it says:
1 - On an interface where the RIP-2 update is sent as a multicast, no
subsumption of routes is required. However, if any two network or
subnet routes have the same set of next hops and either:
Shouldn't this also require the same tag?
Jeff
- Subsumption rules omission Jeffrey C Honig
- Re: Subsumption rules omission Fred Baker