On 5 Jul 2013, at 08:59, Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> I would like the WG to spend some face time dealing with (making a list of),
> things that need to be configured, which are not routes.
>
> (So, I would include prefixes in the list)
>
> I disagree that routes prefixes can be treated separately from routes,
> because one router's prefixes are every other router's routes (well, either
> that,or things don't work).
>
> Far be it from me to object to people doing more work, but... isn't it
> premature to attempt to define a generic architecture to configure anything
> that's possible to congfigure? That seems like it's a lot to bite off, and
> would take a while. Can we get away with a layered approach, where we first
> build a network with working routing, and then we figure out how to run
> services on top of it?
That seems eminently sensible.
Tim
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
