Re: ARP and NHRP question

Juha Heinanen <jh@lohi.dat.tele.fi> Thu, 30 November 1995 06:27 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07421; 30 Nov 95 1:27 EST
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07417; 30 Nov 95 1:27 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 AAA00267; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:56:39 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id BAA09788 for rolc-out; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:08:03 -0500
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 BAA09779 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:07:59 -0500
Received: from lohi.dat.tele.fi (lohi.dat.tele.fi [193.167.64.161]) by nexen.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA04248 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:07:54 -0500
Received: (from jh@localhost) by lohi.dat.tele.fi (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA22025; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:42 +0200
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:55:42 +0200
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Juha Heinanen <jh@lohi.dat.tele.fi>
Message-Id: <199511300555.HAA22025@lohi.dat.tele.fi>
To: laubach@terra.com21.com
CC: carlm@fore.com, asmith@baynetworks.com, bryang@eng.adaptec.com, ip-atm@matmos.hpl.hp.com, rolc@nexen.com, carlm@fore.com
In-reply-to: <Pine.BSI.3.91.951129141518.9634H-100000@terra.com21.com> (laubach@terra.com21.com)
Subject: Re: ARP and NHRP question
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/ Folks, the classic RFC1577 LIS model is our default - our point of dependendable always-available fallback. LISs must be required to support ATMARP by default, or things break in a multi-option, multi-vendor world.

i strongly disagree with the above.  what a lis is required to support
is the decision of the guy who runs the lis, not the ietf.  if i
understand you correctly, even if my lis is all nhrp, i would still need
to have atmarp code and servers around, which doesn't make any sense.

-- juha