On 06/12/2014 07:54 AM, Townsley.net wrote:
I think for an arch document, we should talk generally about how a routing
protocol could plug into the rest of the system, but stop short of details
within the routing protocol itself. If routing experts are concerned the
working group is going to go into bad territory with cost metrics, path
calculation, etc. toying around with text here isn't the way to go about
solving that. This is not a WG charter document, it's not even normative.
Bottom line: I would much rather have routing experts on list rather than
writing our documents for us one discuss at a time.
That was my problem with other parts of the document: it was *way* too
prescriptive about particular
technologies. That is wrong for the kind of document. That should be
hashed out with actual proposed
answers to the architecture document.
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
