Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary
Andrew Smith <asmith@baynetworks.com> Thu, 24 August 1995 18:19 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16366;
24 Aug 95 14:19 EDT
Received: from nexen.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16362;
24 Aug 95 14:19 EDT
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com (maelstrom.nexen.com [204.249.97.5]) by
nexen.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA08834;
Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:04:47 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id
OAA04919 for rolc-out; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:01:29 -0400
Received: from nexen.nexen.com (nexen.nexen.com [204.249.96.18]) by
maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA04910 for
<rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:01:25 -0400
Received: from lightning.synoptics.com (lightning.synoptics.com
[134.177.3.18]) by nexen.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA08802 for
<rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:01:24 -0400
Received: from BayNetworks.COM ([134.177.1.95]) by lightning.synoptics.com
(4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12837; Thu, 24 Aug 95 10:59:29 PDT
Received: from milliways-le0 (milliways-le0.synoptics.com) by BayNetworks.COM
(4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02354; Thu, 24 Aug 95 10:59:42 PDT
Received: by milliways-le0 (4.1/2.0N) id AA27286; Thu, 24 Aug 95 11:01:35 PDT
Message-Id: <9508241801.AA27286@milliways-le0>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 11:01:35 PDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Andrew Smith <asmith@baynetworks.com>
To: rolc@nexen.com, jhalpern@newbridge.com
Subject: Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary
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/
Joel, > It was thought that by providing the forward path the source would be > able to establish the shortcut VC to the furthest possible place. The response to the query in this case should provide the source with the ATM address of the furthest possible place. There is no point returning an ATM address that cannot be used because of policy restrictions. Why then would the source ever need to use the forward path option? > This > would serve to complement the fact that if the intiating hsot can't get > out (a nearby policy restriction) that a router down the way would > presumably establish a shortcut path after a while. The two mechnisms > are designed to cope with the two likely policy restriction scenarios. Then I repeat - let NHSs use these options if they want to but don't allow them in the client-NHS protocol. > Yours, > Joel M. Halpern jhalpern@newbridge.com > Newbridge Networks Inc. Andrew ******************************************************************************** Andrew Smith TEL: +1 408 764 1574 Technology Synergy Unit FAX: +1 408 988 5525 Bay Networks, Inc. E-m: asmith@baynetworks.com Santa Clara, CA ********************************************************************************
- NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Yakov Rekhter
- Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Andrew G. Malis
- Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Yakov Rekhter
- Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Andrew Smith
- Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Joel Halpern
- Re: NHS Record extensions seem to be unnecessary Andrew Smith