Subject: Re: PIM hello option DR priority

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 10:31:51 -0700

>Sigh, this was due to the code assignment conflict with other options.
>It was discovered only later when the drafts were consolidated.

I'm just confused why the one that was published earlier (DR priority)
was the one that got renumbered.

I think the trend is towards Liming's option #3, which I agree with.
Someone mentioned that you can tell the difference by using the length
of the option; presumably this would only be for backwards compatibility.

BTW, now that we've opened this can of worms, why are 2-16 reserved?
What's 17 used for?

  Bill

---

From: Liming Wei <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 12:15:42 -0700 (PDT)

> From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 10:31:51 -0700
> 

Ok, folks please give us some time. I figure it might be easier for
people to get agreement in private, sometimes. I'll report back on
the result. If there are other people affected, please either a message
here, or contact me and Tom directly.

> BTW, now that we've opened this can of worms, why are 2-16 reserved?

I need to go back and find out why.

 Thanks,
-Liming

---

From: Yiqun Cai <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:11:55 -0700 (PDT)

> What's 17 used for?

It is being used for Multicast TAG switching. 

-- 
Yiqun

---

From: Liming Wei <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:15:51 -0700 (PDT)

> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Yiqun Cai <[email-masked]>
> 
> > What's 17 used for?
> 

It was removed from the spec because it was a vendor specific thing.

Now I think it needs to go back in the spec, with or without a
reference spec for multicast tag switching.

-Liming