Re: ARP and NHRP question

Grenville Armitage <gja@thumper.bellcore.com> Tue, 28 November 1995 16:05 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18237; 28 Nov 95 11:05 EST
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18233; 28 Nov 95 11:05 EST
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com (maelstrom.nexen.com [204.249.98.5]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA15935; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:34:15 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA11584 for rolc-out; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:46:02 -0500
Received: from guelah.nexen.com (guelah.nexen.com [204.249.96.19]) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA11575 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:46:00 -0500
Received: from thumper.bellcore.com (thumper.bellcore.com [128.96.41.1]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA15875 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:31:07 -0500
Received: from thumper (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thumper.bellcore.com (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id KAA25852; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:41:13 -0500
Message-Id: <199511281541.KAA25852@thumper.bellcore.com>
To: Bryan Gleeson <bryang@eng.adaptec.com>
cc: salo@msc.edu, rolc@nexen.com, gja@thumper.bellcore.com
Subject: Re: ARP and NHRP question
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 27 Nov 1995 19:33:54 -0800. <9511280333.AA20698@eng.adaptec.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:41:06 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Grenville Armitage <gja@thumper.bellcore.com>
X-Orig-Sender: owner-rolc@nexen.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Info: Submissions to rolc@nexen.com
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to rolc-request@nexen.com
X-Info: Archives for rolc via ftp://ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/ietf-mail-archive/rolc/

[Bryan commented...]
>>I agree with Andrew
>>that we need to start looking at server redundancy for NHRP soon if
>>it is going to be really useful.

This raises an interesting question in my mind - given NHRP's
move to fabric mode, where I presume NHSs are co-resident
with routers (or at least the route servers), do
redundant NHSs imply redundant route servers? Is this
covered by some other WG?


gja

(chopped ip-atm from the cc list)