ok, let's not drag vendor specific stuff in. I shouldn't have brought it up I guess, outside the scope of IETF threads ...
thanks --- tony On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:23 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > > Tony, > > > On Jun 10, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Tony Przygienda <[email protected]> wrote: > > You do seem to be carrying as WG member a hot torch for area-proxy for > some reason, that's fine with me, frankly, I had extensive discussions with > customers when DriveNet was being proposed to them (which AFAIS is > basically area-proxy) and the solution is intriguing but it did not cut > lots of requirements of large customers and there are a lot of unresolved > issues operationally with an approach like that. > > > > Drivenets, as I understand it, is an attempt to physically deaggregate a > multi-chassis fabric down to the chip level using a proprietary > chip-set-specific cell based interlink protocol. However, it retains a > single control plane and as such looks like a single IS-IS system. It has > no relationship whatsoever to area proxy. > > Regards, > Tony > > > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
