> On 31 Mar 2015, at 17:07, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is true, however that downref would have to get IETF consensus, which > could be a sticking point if there are a lot of people in the routing area > who believe that Babel is problematic for some reason.
Thanks Ted - yes, that's much more accurate :) > This isn't particularly an issue as far as the design team goes because I > think we can take it as a given that the design team is going to consider > Babel as one of the options Yes, I believe we can. > and if Babel is selected then I get the impression that there will be > reasonably strong motivation in the routing area to bring it up to proposed > standard. Indeed, even more so since Markus demonstrated how easy it was to implement :) > But the real problem here is that the working group needs to pick a routing > protocol that's mandatory to implement, so that the Homenet routers that > eventually get shipped can route between each other. That's the point of > the design team. Ray _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
