hi antoni, i am all for accepting it as a WG item - IMO its an excellent proofpoint that really large datacenters can be run based on exisiting protocols and even getting to 10000s of routing nodes is not the end of the world.
tx, /hannes On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 04:26:48PM +0000, Antoni Przygienda wrote: | Personally, would tend to agree that GROW is a better place than RTGWG looking @ charters or possibly even NVO3 (albeit this work does not seem to address multi TS or mobility @ first glance or maybe the intention is for this to be an 'underlay' for lack of better terms) ? | | Work is surely interesting and would be nice to see a presentation and get a floor discussion going | | --- tony | | > -----Original Message----- | > From: rtgwg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of | > [email protected] | > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 7:39 AM | > To: Petr Lapukhov; [email protected] | > Cc: [email protected] | > Subject: RE: WG review for draft-lapukhov-bgp-routing-large-dc | > | > Support. | > Wouldn't GROW be a better home than RTGWG? | > | | _______________________________________________ | rtgwg mailing list | [email protected] | https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
