Hi, > Op 26 jul. 2015, om 03:07 heeft Ted Lemon <[email protected]> het volgende > geschreven: > > Thanks, but the working group is not confused as to whether IS-IS could be > made to work. We understand that it could be made to work. One active > participant in the working group has an open source implementation. It > works. It lacks a feature we want, but that feature could be added. > However, adding that feature would be a new research project, which would > require a substantial game of catch-up. That is why there is a controversy > about this in the working group. Otherwise I would be wholeheartedly > supporting IS-IS—I fought against the consideration of Babel back when it > first came up, on the grounds that we already had good candidates, and have > no personal stake in its winning other than that I now think it would get us > across the finish line faster, if we were allowed to use it.
I think this is a good summary. We seem to have something that works well for what we need. I am sure we can come up with something even better, but at some point we need to realise that good enough is good enough. As an ISP I want to reach the point where I can actually deliver homenet-capable products to my customers. Cheers, Sander _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
