Re: ARP and NHRP question

James Watt <james@ca.newbridge.com> Wed, 22 November 1995 20:19 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20275; 22 Nov 95 15:19 EST
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20271; 22 Nov 95 15:19 EST
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com (maelstrom.nexen.com [204.249.97.5]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA22998; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:47:02 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA08480 for rolc-out; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:59:42 -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 OAA08471 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:59:38 -0500
Received: from ns.newbridge.com (ns.newbridge.com [192.75.23.67]) by nexen.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA24457 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:59:37 -0500
Received: (from adm@localhost) by ns.newbridge.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA06492; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:54:24 -0500
Received: from portero(192.75.23.66) by ns via smap (V1.3) id sma006485; Wed Nov 22 14:54:17 1995
Received: from thor.ca.newbridge.com (thor121.ca.newbridge.com [138.120.121.43]) by kanmaster.ca.newbridge.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA01752; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:54:16 -0500
Received: from fields.newbridge (fields.ca.newbridge.com [138.120.144.160]) by thor.ca.newbridge.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA10532; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:54:16 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: James Watt <james@ca.newbridge.com>
Message-Id: <199511221954.OAA10532@thor.ca.newbridge.com>
Subject: Re: ARP and NHRP question
To: ip-atm@matmos.hpl.hp.com, rolc@nexen.com
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:54:14 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1197
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/

Mark Laubach writes:
+--------
|> I would agree with what you seem to be implying. Native NHRP clients should
|> be permitted to exist and should be allowed to coexist with ATMARP clients
|> in a LIS.....
|
|Andy and I were already planning to issue a joint statement in the ipatm
|and rolc meetings regarding this very topic.  We'll be mostly replaying
|what has been discussed prior at the Danvers and the Stockholm meetings. 
|It will be good to see some contributions and such on the topic. 
+---------
My observation would be that I would prefer the complexity to be in the
server, not all of the clients.
 
I would suggest that if the client speaks NHRP, it should always do so.  If
the NHRP server doesn't provide an answer (doesn't have one, doesn't want
to, etc.) then the client should ATMARP.
 
This would suggest that most NHRP servers should also be ATMARP servers and
thus be able to answer all questions with one request, not two.
 
Comments ?
-james
____________________________________________________________________________
James W. Watt,     james@newbridge.com                   Ph: +1 613 591-3600
Newbridge Networks 600 March Rd Kanata ON Canada K2K 2E6 FAX:+1 613 591-3680