Hi Kireeti,

Not to push your analogy too far: having several power plug standards means 
that many (but not all) power supplies eat the cost of supporting both 110V and 
220V outlets.  The physical "encapsulation" gateway is relatively easy; the 
semantic translation (transformer from 110<->220) is harder.

What the draft is saying is, let's have a common voltage standard (BGP); we 
should decide later whether and how and where to do the physical conversion.


[[LY]] For the context of power voltage, there are several standard power 
voltage levels that are necessary for power transportation industry. They exist 
for technical reason. This is why I ask if there is a technical reason to 
standardize a set of encapsulations for nv03 in early email. In fact, that you 
(me too) want one control plane protocol to apply all nvo3 data planes, I 
think, is the same purpose: simple and avoid interworking. 

Since we don't disagree here, no need to continually make fun here. :)

Lucy

Kireeti.

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to