Subject: [rbridge] Comments on: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/dr aft-ietf-trill-rbridge-arch-01.txt

From: Eric.Gray at marconi.com (Gray, Eric)
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 12:31:38 -0500

Russ,

	Just to amplify, I did not say anyone would necessarily be
breaking the interoperability model by implementing an ECMP-like
approach for L2 in their TRILL implementation.  What I said was 
that - if this is considered out of scope for TRILL work, then 
anyone who implements a proprietary (or subsequent standard) L2
ECMP-like approach would be responsible for ensuring that their
implementation works with (by that time) existing RBridges.

--
Eric

--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: Russ White [mailto:riw at cisco.com] 
--> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:16 PM
--> To: Silvano Gai
--> Cc: Gray, Eric; rbridge at postel.org
--> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Comments on: 
--> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/dr 
--> aft-ietf-trill-rbridge-arch-01.txt
--> 
--> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
--> Hash: SHA1
--> 
--> 
--> >>>> 	The notion of using a L2 version of ECMP is - 
--> IMO - in no way
--> >>>> implied
--> >>>> by the text in the charter.  Nor is there any explicit 
--> intention to
--> > preclude
--> >>>> this type of activity - with the caveat that anyone 
--> doing so has to
--> > assume
--> >>>> responsibility for not "breaking" the interoperability model.
--> > 
--> >> Why are you breaking the interoperability model?
--> 
--> That's a quote from Eric, not me.... I'm not convinced you 
--> are or aren't.
--> 
--> :-)
--> 
--> Russ
--> 
--> 
--> - --
--> riw at cisco.com CCIE <>< Grace Alone
--> 
--> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
--> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
--> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
--> 
--> iD8DBQFFSNYzER27sUhU9OQRAo69AJ4lk+k+94ohK3+4deY7ylKBDUA8nACfUS2P
--> VNXpx0HqsCabI5GWAT86HUY=
--> =j/oK
--> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-->