Subject: IPFC Mandatory Requirements

From: Murali Rajagopal <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:12:32 -0800

Folks:

FARP for resolving <WW_PN, Port_ID> as it is stated today in 03.txt is an
optional support feature on FARP-REQ and Mandatory on FARP-REPLY if the node
matches the WW_PN.

In other words, the standard does NOT require one to implement a FARP-REQ.
I think this is a trend carried from the Fibre Channel world, where there
too many 
ways to do things, resulting in interoperability problems.

One way to reduce this danger is to make FARP for resolving <WW_PN, Port_ID>
mandatory  
as a minimum.

One can use a similar argument  and make ARP mandatory on replies and we all
know, that is not good enough.

There is little in the way of this standard if only ARP is mandatory.

Sure, there are other ways of resolving this using a Name Server for
example. But that mode of thinking is irrelevant for this discussion and our
attempt to make a standard.

If I don't hear from you, I'll make this part of the 04.txt draft.
Supporters of this, please email  your responses to all.

Regards,
Murali Rajagopal