The Routing Over Large Clouds Mailing List Archive by date[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] New ION group - history for the archives?
(Not wanting to disappoint Grenville): malis@nexen.com wrote: > To quote the charter: > > This WG will focus on the issues involved in internetworking network > layer protocols over NBMA (non-broadcast multiple access) subnetwork > technologies ... The group will endeavor to make all its solutions > applicable to the entire range of network layer protocols and NBMA > subnetworks. ... ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^ Not a good prospect for ATM. > > going to be asked by my clients is "will MPOA have any need to exist?" > > The MPOA group has already been working closely with the ipatm and > rolc working groups (after all, many of the same people are doing the > work in both places), and George and I both support the continued > cooperation and coordination between MPOA and ion. Does MPOA need to > exist? I certainly think so, given that the ATM Forum and IETF have > different charters and focus. Agreed. And given that ATM is not just another NBMA network, MPOA would presumably use some of the generic ION work and capitalize on ATM's features to go beyond the value that other NBMA nets can add. (I guess this was the expected comment from me.) Bert manfredi@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com |
|