Subject: [rbridge] Time to summarize "forward or block" BPDU thread

From: Eric.Gray at marconi.com (Gray, Eric)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:04:31 -0300

Joe,

	I am deeply concerned that there seems to be some differences
in opinion between those that are working on the draft(s?) and a lot
of the rest of the working group.

	More-over, I am not sure that the differences are entirely in
terminology.  But I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

--
Eric

--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org 
--> [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org]On
--> Behalf Of Joe Touch
--> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 10:27 AM
--> To: Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
--> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Time to summarize "forward or block" 
--> BPDU thread
--> 
--> 
--> _______________________________________________
--> rbridge mailing list
--> rbridge at postel.org
--> http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
--> 

Earlier you wrote (and by the way I wish I didn't have to do it 
this way, but your E-Mail is broken :-):

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> 
> 
> --On 17. oktober 2005 05:17 -0700 Joe Touch <touch at ISI.EDU> wrote:
> 
>> WHEN (note the use of 'when', not 'if', since there's *nothing* that can
>> be done to enforce this) this isn't the case, the following problems
>> arise:
>>
>>     a) there is no way to detect the error
>>
>>     b) loops *will* occur
> 
> 
> You know, I really can't tell whether this is true or not without
> looking at the protocol specification that says how the RBridges detect
> each other.
> 
> Should this discussion wait for the drafts to come out?

As someone trying to write the drafts, I'm trying to understand the
terminology that will determine this.

I have a MUCH better idea of how to explain things now - whether I agree
with them at all levels or not, so this discussion IS helping, FWIW.

Joe