Subject: Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft

From: Anoop Ghanwani <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:50:57 -0700

I support making this document a WG draft.

Anoop

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> wrote:

> During the TRILL session today, there was a consensus of those in the
> room to make draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00.txt a TRILL WG draft. This is a
> call on the WG mailing list to confirm that consensus. If you wish to
> respond, please do so by April 10th.
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  [email-masked]
>
> _______________________________________________
> rbridge mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
>
_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 15:47:59 -0400

All of the proposals have some good and bad features.

The approval of the CMT draft as a working group draft is not final
approval to request RFC publication. I think the CMT draft needs some
more work particularly to cover failure cases.

I don't think the WG has decided the details of multi-topology yet.
If, when it does so, MT provides a simpler way to do what the CMT
draft does, then I think those using multi-topology should be able to
use that technique to solve this problem.

I believe the CMT draft only covers cases where the RBridges are not
adjacent in that they can't see each other's Hellos. (You might refer
to this case by the oxymoronic term "opaque link".) For the case where
the RBridges are adjacent and you could easily have a pseudo node, I
believe a separate draft is needed. I tend to think that such a draft
would probably end up using the CMT sub-TLV but it might not.

Thanks,
Donald

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 17:14:02 +0800

> For the case where the RBridges are adjacent and you could easily have a 
pseudo node, I
> would probably end up using the CMT sub-TLV but it might not.

The using of CMT sub-TLV in PN draft has been dicussed among the authors 
of CMT and PN drafts. In the next version of PN draft, we will use CMT 
sub-TLV to slove the RPF and make PN a more common framework for both 
pt-pt and multi-access LAN.

Thanks,
Zhai Hongjun
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
 Protocol Development Dept.VI, Central R&D Institute, ZTE Corporation
 No. 68, Zijinghua Road, Yuhuatai District, Nanjing, P.R.China, 210012
 
 Zhai Hongjun
 
 Tel: +86-25-52877345
 Email: [email-masked]
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> 
发件人:  [email-masked]
2012-04-06 03:47

收件人
[email-masked]
抄送

主题
Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft

Thanks,
Donald

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge