The Routing Over Large Clouds Mailing List Archive by date

[James Watt <james@ca.newbridge.com>]

Mark Laubach writes:
+--------
|> I would agree with what you seem to be implying. Native NHRP clients should
|> be permitted to exist and should be allowed to coexist with ATMARP clients
|> in a LIS.....
|
|Andy and I were already planning to issue a joint statement in the ipatm
|and rolc meetings regarding this very topic.  We'll be mostly replaying
|what has been discussed prior at the Danvers and the Stockholm meetings. 
|It will be good to see some contributions and such on the topic. 
+---------
My observation would be that I would prefer the complexity to be in the
server, not all of the clients.
 
I would suggest that if the client speaks NHRP, it should always do so.  If
the NHRP server doesn't provide an answer (doesn't have one, doesn't want
to, etc.) then the client should ATMARP.
 
This would suggest that most NHRP servers should also be ATMARP servers and
thus be able to answer all questions with one request, not two.
 
Comments ?
-james
____________________________________________________________________________
James W. Watt,     james@newbridge.com                   Ph: +1 613 591-3600
Newbridge Networks 600 March Rd Kanata ON Canada K2K 2E6 FAX:+1 613 591-3680