Juliusz, On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Then it shall compare these routing requirements to > > candidate routing protocols and examine the gaps in each. For each > > highly plausible candidate routing protocol, the design team will > > estimate the work and actions needed, the resources at hand > > or reasonably available, and the associated timeline to get > > an acceptable, full, standardized solution using each protocol. > > I don't see the word "proven" or the words "implementation experience". > > My (perhaps mistaken) feeling is that whenever I mention an important > feature of Babel, there's a chorus of "that could be done in IS-IS, we > just haven't done it yet". I've tried to explain that many of the things > that Babel is doing are difficult or outright impossible[1] in IS-IS, but > I don't feel like I've been heard. > > Can the charter please make sure that the design team will only consider > features that have been implemented and proven to work? > The design team is considering the work to get an acceptable, full, and standardized solution. One aspect of that can be having multiple interoperable independent implementations. That doesn't mean that everything has to be implemented already but it should be clear that the work necessary is engineering and not research. Regards, Alia -- Juliusz > > [1] Dijkstra, next-hop routing, non-distributive metric. Pick any two, > but you can't have all three. >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
