> Allowing caching means that we have to specify additional mechanisms (such > as read-through and write-through, and returns for successful writes that do > not actually take effect, and probably other aspects.)
I don't really see it as "caching..." I'm thinking more of the backup route situation in the RIB, specifically. > So we agreed that was for future consideration, as it is by no means minor. I would argue it's worthwhile to at least leave space in the protocol definition for the third return option, and leave it up to agent implementations to deal with the complexity if desired in the future. :-) Russ _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
