Subject: [rbridge] Draft minutes posted

From: sajassi at cisco.com (Ali Sajassi (sajassi))
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:32:07 -0800

> 
> There is no TTL field on the 802.1ah, afaik, so the .1ah 
> would require modification.

As mentioned in my previous email, if this is an issue, we can try to accommodate it. Is there anything else ?

-Ali

> Guillermo
> 
> Ali Sajassi (sajassi) escribi?:
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, if there is any reason as to why .1ah encap cannot be 
> used, then 
> > I would like to hear it.
> > 
> > -Ali
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org
> >> [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org] On Behalf Of Don Fedyk
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 10:17 AM
> >> To: Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
> >> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Draft minutes posted
> >>
> >> Hi Erik
> >>
> >> In the minutes: 
> >> 802.1ah header synergy?  On this point myself, and I recall Ali 
> >> Sajassi and Donald Oconnor all stood up and said that 802.1ah is 
> >> going to be a standard encapsulation header. My point was Trill 
> >> should see what it could deliver on this encapsulation before 
> >> inventing similar but different headers.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Don
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org
> >>> At http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06nov/minutes/trill.txt
> >>>
> >>> Any corrections?
> >>>
> >>>     Erik
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rbridge mailing list
> >> rbridge at postel.org
> >> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
> >>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > rbridge mailing list
> > rbridge at postel.org
> > http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
> > 
>