On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote: > Unfortunately, the code is NOT going to be that sensitive to the variations > of the use case. The same code that the Tier 1 carrier is using is the same > code on much smaller systems. We need to find a behavior that is amenable to > all.
One behavior may not suit all cases. That's why we have options. If we only had one router I guess it would be the biggest, most expensive router possible; because big networks need these. Fortunately vendors understand that they need to produce options to suit different kinds of customers. They also need to produce configuration knobs to suit different kinds of customers. This standards body creates options every time it uses a capitalized word except MUST or MUST NOT. If options weren't needed, RFC2119 would be a lot shorter. -- Jeff S Wheeler <[email protected]> Sr Network Operator / Innovative Network Concepts _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
