Subject: Re: MSDP spec 14

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 13:52:58 -0800

>> As discussed today in mboned wg:
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-msdp-spec-14.txt
>> 

Folks, this is the official start of the WG Last call on this
document. Comments to the list.

Thanks,

Dave

---

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 13:52:58 -0800

Thanks,

Dave

---

From: Guo Feng <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 19:37:53 +0800

Two questions:

1.Why is the notification TLV removed ?

2.There are no description about Request and Response TLV Function , will
those two TLVs be obsolete ?

Thanks,

Feng

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Meyer" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 5:52 AM
Subject: Re: MSDP spec 14

---

From: Guo Feng <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 19:37:53 +0800

Two questions:

Thanks,

Feng

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 05:47:15 -0800

> 1.Why is the notification TLV removed ?

Because it is not supported in all of the existing implementations
and operational practice in the current deployed Internets MSDP
infrastructure seem to have shown that that is not a mayor loss -
aka: the notification TLVs do not seem to be urgently required to
interoperate MSDP.

> those two TLVs be obsolete ?

None of the things removed from the spec are obsolete, they are
just not part of the MSP spec anymore: We have circled for several years
around the approach to make a short term solution as good as possible and
did not get anywhere. Now we have changed the goal to only include
what can considered to be minimally needed to interoperate MSDP
and to provide a base functionality that has shown to be implemented
by the majority of implementations available and deployed.

If a vendor wants to provide this or any other function that at one point
in time was (or was not) in the MSDP spec, then he simply adds it to his
implementation. He only need to figure out then how to keep his implementation
interoperable with the base of MSDP which is specified in the MSDP spec.
There are lots of possibilities on how to do this.

Cheers
	Toerless

-- 
Thanks
   Toerless Eckert

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 05:47:15 -0800

Cheers
	Toerless

-- 
Thanks
   Toerless Eckert