Re: ROLC Overview

Juha Heinanen <Juha.Heinanen@lohi.dat.tele.fi> Wed, 08 March 1995 07:44 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26602; 8 Mar 95 2:44 EST
Received: from maelstrom.acton.timeplex.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26598; 8 Mar 95 2:44 EST
Received: from lohi.dat.tele.fi (lohi.dat.tele.fi [131.177.104.142]) by maelstrom.acton.timeplex.com (8.6.9/ACTON-MAIN-1.2) with SMTP id CAA19272 for <rolc@acton.timeplex.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 02:36:11 -0500
Message-Id: <199503080736.CAA19272@maelstrom.acton.timeplex.com>
Received: from lohi.dat.tele.fi by lohi.dat.tele.fi id <10498-0@lohi.dat.tele.fi>; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 09:36:48 +0200
To: jwg@garage.att.com
CC: rolc@acton.timeplex.com
In-reply-to: <9503072005.AA23180@ig1.att.att.com> (jwg@garage.att.com)
Subject: Re: ROLC Overview
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 09:36:48 +0200
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Juha Heinanen <Juha.Heinanen@lohi.dat.tele.fi>
X-Orig-Sender: Juha.Heinanen@lohi.dat.tele.fi

one could also separate the next hop resolution problem from the address
resolution problem.  

when i saw about two years ago that nhrp has its problems, i proposed a
simple, scalable protocol called nbma arp to solve the address
resolution part.  nbma arp can be thought as an extension of atmarp and
we could have proceed with in in ipoveratm wg.  it was not, however,
done, since some people believed that nhrp (which ramesh and i also
wrote the first drafts of) could be enhanced to get rid of the loop
problems.

now two years have passed and we don't have anything!  perhaps ipoveratm
group should take another serious look at nbma arp as the atmarp
extension and consider nhrp again once rolc has the definite solution
(if such even exists).

-- juha