Pedro Roque Marques <[email protected]> writes:
> Benson,
> I object to the document on the following points:
> 2) It appears to "dismiss" RFC4364 based on the requirements of section
> 2.7.
OK. This is clearly a contentious point and will need to be deferred
to when we do a gap analysis.
Proposed new text:
There are a number of VPN approaches that provide some if
not all of the desired semantics of virtual networks. A gap
analysis will be needed to assess how well existing
approaches satisfy the requirements.
To replace:
There are number of VPN approaches that provide some of the
desired semantics of virtual networks
(e.g., <xref target="RFC4364"></xref>). But VPN approaches
have traditionally been deployed across WANs and have not
seen widespread deployment within enterprise data
centers. They are not necessarily seen as supporting the
characteristics outlined in Section 2.7.
Does that work?
Thomas
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
