Re: ARP and NHRP question

[Andrew Smith <[e-mail]>]

> From [e-mail] Sat Dec  2 12:59:54 1995
> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:11:37 -0800 (PST)
> From: Mark Laubach <[e-mail]>
> To: Juha Heinanen <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
>         [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: ARP and NHRP question

Mark,

> The next step of anything we do in a step-by-step
> process requires the support of existing implementations and will still
> require atmarp code in the client.  

What you propose is just one way of providing a transition plan. An equally 
valid plan would deploy multi-protocol support in the servers and only a
single protocol in the clients.

> Granted, that we decided to aim
> towards NHRP at the Danver's meeting - it is just that it takes two steps
> to get there, not one. 

It only requires one step in the clients - that is the important issue here.

> Mark

Andrew


P.S. I apologise for not attending the IETF meetings - other commitments preclude.


********************************************************************************
Andrew Smith					TEL:	[phone]
Technology Synergy Unit				FAX:	[phone]
Bay Networks, Inc.				E-m:	[e-mail]
Santa Clara, CA
********************************************************************************