Subject: Re: [Mtp] the more things change, the more they stay the same

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:04:15 -0700

On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 02:17:38PM -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> 
> It was never clear to me why a host to router signaling mechanism had 
> to be different from the router to router signaling mechanism.

Here's one reason: because if we had this conversation in 1993 we
would have made the host to router signalling mechanism DVMRP, or
maybe we would have been looking toward the future and made it MOSPF.

The generalization of that is the goal is to be able to evolve
the routing protocol independently of the host<>router interface.
Since there are orders of magnitudes more hosts to change than
routers when a protocol changes, this theoretically makes the
infrastructure more able to change piecemeal.

  Bill

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

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:28:42 -0700 (PDT)

> infrastructure more able to change piecemeal.

except that it's hasn't in practice because we have two things that w e 
than have to evolve in parallel.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Joel Jaeggli	      Academic User Services   [email-masked]    
--    PGP Key Fingerprint: 1DE9 8FCA 51FB 4195 B42A 9C32 A30D 121E      --
  In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last
  resort of the scoundrel.  With all due respect to an enlightened but
  inferior lexicographer I beg to submit that it is the first.
	   	            -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:28:42 -0700 (PDT)