Subject: [bmwg] IGP Data Plane Convergence work item

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:59:53 -0400

BMWG-ers

While everyone is hopped-up on the subject of convergence I think this is a
good time to assess the status of the IGP Data Plane Convergence work item.
Over the past 12 months we have received numerous comments from many people.
Does anyone have any additional comments so that we know the readiness for
Last Call?

Benchmarking Applicability for IGP Data Plane Route Convergence
</internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-02.txt>(12274
bytes)
Terminology for Benchmarking IGP Data Plane Route Convergence
</internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-02.txt>(61350
bytes)
Benchmarking Methodology for IGP Data Plane Route Convergence
</internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-02.txt>(28944
bytes)

Scott

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 13:42:52 -0400

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 1:07 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [bmwg] IGP Data Plane Convergence work item

Perhaps it would be worth knowing -- are there any terminology 
harmonization issues between the IGP and EGP documents?  

Scott>  None that I know of.

Is it the 
sense of the working group that IGP and EGP terminology are 
essentially separate? 
Scott> Yes.  In fact there are two separate terminologies for IGP
convergence- 1 for OSPF 
Control Plane Convergence and 1 for IGP Data Plane Convergence. 

Is there a union-of-sets of terminology common 
to both?

Scott> None that I see.

Any general thoughts?