Cell Relay Archive

[ronald davis <ronald@huitzilo.tezcat.com>]

the tag-arch.ps document to which you referred (which is a brief summary
of the internet draft document) makes specific mention to the role of
tag switching in an atm environment.  that's not my being "determined"
to read something that's not there - it's plainly there.

my point for raising the issues that i did in my original post was
to open some discussion about why cisco didn't put forth the tag
switching proposal in the context of the already written i-pnni
proposal in the atm forum.  is it an attempt to control atm routing
by making a cisco proposal a de facto standard (a la newbridge with
mpoa)?  is it an attempt to undercut ipsillon networks (to some degree,
i suspect it is)?  there's a lot of self-serving vendor hype going
around these days, and i think that it's worth discussing what's real
and what's hype...

>>	1. similarities between tag switching and i-pnni which is a
>>	   very atm-focused protocol.
>>
>
>There a *couple* of similarities, but overall, they are quite
>different.
>

could you be a bit more specific?  for instance, is tag switching *not*
based upon the notion of a router-centric peer group as described in the
i-pnni document?  if so, maybe a discussion of the differences could be
made using that as a base.

>Again, tag switching can certainly be used in an ATM environment,
>but there is nothing which compels it to be sole transport.
>

there was never any statement made that tag switching *only* works
in an atm environment; but there is *clearly* an attempt to suggest
tag switching as a routing protocol for an atm environment.

>I would also recommend that you review:
>
> Tag Switching Architechure
> ftp://ftp-eng.cisco.com/bdavie/tag-arch.ps

this is really a slide show presentation.  i suspect that the reference
document is the internet draft from the ietf network working group 
entitled "tag switching architecture overview", by rekhter, et. al.