Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption"

Gary Scott Malkin <gmalkin@xylogics.com> Fri, 13 November 1992 14:19 UTC

Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Gary Scott Malkin <gmalkin@xylogics.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 09:20:43 -0500
Message-Id: <27110.199211131420@atlas.xylogics.com>
To: jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: dennis@ans.net, ietf-rip@xylogics.com
In-Reply-To: Noel Chiappa's message of Thu, 12 Nov 92 18:37:56 -0500 <9211122337.AA13273@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption"

I take it that the problem is that non-contiguous subnets will cause
things to break, which is why they were illegal in RIP-1.  Well,
they're illegal in RIP-2 by inheritance.  RIP-2 changes only what
RIP-2 changes, everything else is the same.  I can put in some
text explicitly forbidding partitioning when the RFC goes to Draft.

Is that the only problem?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Malkin                         Humankind asks: "Why are we here?"
(617) 272-8140                      Earth responds: "PLASTIC, morons."

Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption" Dennis Ferguson
Re: Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption" Noel Chiappa
Re: Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption" Fred Baker
Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption" Gary Scott Malkin
Re: Concerns about ripv2 "subsumption" Dennis Ferguson