Hi all, We have an ISIS auto-configuration draft under developing in ISIS WG (draft-liu-isis-auto-conf). Since Homenet/SME networks are one of the main scenarios our draft targets at, and we already have an OSPF-autoconf mechanism available (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig), during the isis meeting some people raised the question whether Homenet WG want to support multiple IGP auto-configuration mechanisms.
I checked the meeting minutes of the last Homenet meeting. And found the status of the issue is: - WG had decided to have both a configuration protocol (HNCP) + a routing protocol - WG hasn't decided to have only one routing protocol or two, or even N... - it seems only one routing protocol has more support May I ask a couple of questions: 1) Is it necessary to enforce only one routing protocol? If HNCP is adopted, I guess multiple routing protocols could be easily supported ? I think it might be more flexible if homenet router support multiple routing protocols. Is there any harm? (Note: supporting multiple routing protocols here doesn't mean they need run at the same time, just more choices.) 2) If we decide to have only one, then what is the criteria for protocol selection? Look forward to your comments. Many thanks. Best regards, Bing _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
