Re: NHRP
shur@arch4.ho.att.com Mon, 16 October 1995 13:54 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09051;
16 Oct 95 9:54 EDT
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09047;
16 Oct 95 9:54 EDT
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com ([204.249.99.5]) by guelah.nexen.com
(8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA25830; Mon, 16 Oct 1995 09:28:55 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id
JAA03404 for rolc-out; Mon, 16 Oct 1995 09:38:16 -0400
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 JAA03395 for
<rolc@nexen.com>; Mon, 16 Oct 1995 09:38:13 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: shur@arch4.ho.att.com
Received: from gw2.att.com (gw2.att.com [192.20.239.134]) by guelah.nexen.com
(8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA25822 for <rolc@nexen.com>;
Mon, 16 Oct 1995 09:28:40 -0400
Received: from arch4.ho.att.com by ig1.att.att.com id AA25409;
Mon, 16 Oct 95 09:31:11 EDT
Received: from dahlia.ho.att.com by arch4.ho.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.2 GIS)
id AA15511; Mon, 16 Oct 95 09:32:10 EDT
Received: by dahlia.ho.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1 SunOS)
id AA18383; Mon, 16 Oct 95 09:32:33 EDT
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 95 09:32:33 EDT
Message-Id: <9510161332.AA18383@dahlia.ho.att.com>
To: rolc@nexen.com, yakov@cisco.com
Subject: Re: NHRP
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/
Yakov, > > Folks, > > Few days ago I posted a note asking what is the use of Q and S bits. > Since nobody explained (so far) their use, let me suggest that we > take them out of the document. > > Yakov. > Version IV of the draft (is there a later one?) states that the Q and S bits indicate whether NHRP requestor and NBMA next hop respectively is a host or a router. Perhaps this information could be useful in avoiding router-router cut-through routing loops in an environment where the solution for the router-router case is not defined, but where host-host, host-router, router-host cut-through procedures are? David.