<adding mailing list> No, I don’t think they should reside under a DPN. Groups like these also span multiple DPNs which would make containment graphs far too confusing.
From: Charlie Perkins [mailto:charles.perk...@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 10:51 PM To: Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] <lyle.t.be...@sprint.com> Cc: Marco Liebsch <marco.lieb...@neclab.eu>; Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsush...@gmail.com>; Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <sgund...@cisco.com>; Moses, Danny <danny.mo...@intel.com>; Weaver, Farni [CTO] <farni.wea...@sprint.com>; Matsushima Satoru <satoru.matsush...@g.softbank.co.jp> Subject: Question about Interface Groups Hello folks, Can we have it so that all the Interfaces of an "Interface Group" (formerly, "DPN Group") reside on the same DPN? If so, I can make good sense out of the text in the document, but otherwise I think there are big problems. I have some other questions, but this is the main thing right now. If the answer to my question is "Yes" I think I will have a sensible revision tomorrow. I have some more questions, not quite as important, which I will put in separate emails. Regards, Charlie P. On 1/18/2018 5:26 AM, Bertz, Lyle T [CTO] wrote: Charlie, Glad to hear things are going well. I’m looking forward to your document update. Lyle ________________________________ This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
