On 11/22/19, 10:03 AM, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> - Freeform performance penalty (points?) - finger in the wind numbers
(make sure to emphasize that it is an estimate) - include things like other
resources used (CAM entries, memory, etc?). Number would only be relative to
the device itself.
I had to leave around this discussion, but I really wasn’t following why
this would be better than straight forwarding capacity. That is, an overall
“points” value doesn’t necessarily help much since some may care about CAM
space and some may care about forwarding capacity, but they don’t know how the
points break down. Like Frank, I’d like to stick to something simple and more
well-defined like forwarding capacity.
AG: After pondering this overnight, I think I agree with this. Coming up with
a number, while possible, isn't really meaningful. Operators generally expect
turning additional options on reduce the capacity for other items as it stands.
> - Informational or Standards track?
It’s informational now, and I have no problem with that given the looseness
in the draft. As it evolves, it may be better to move it to Standards. I
think it should stay where it is for now.
AG: I'll leave it Informational for the moment then, but I agree I think
Standards probably should be its eventual home. I had some feedback to split
up the draft between defining the model defining the data exchange, and a
separate draft talking about the command and control aspect, which may change
this up somewhat. Thoughts?
E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for
the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender
by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly
prohibited.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
