I believe this document needs some significant revision before it is considered 
or even presented again. Rather then spending 8 pages listing comparing FAR to 
some naïve OSPF implementation and claiming that it solves all the attendant 
routing problems, you should start the draft with an overview of the protocol 
and including some concrete arguments as to why it scales better than existing 
IGPs. Then you need to provide a more detailed description of how the protocol 
works. It is not apparent from the text and there are a number of unanswered 
questions. For example, if flooding is unreliable, how do you know reachability 
and failures are propagated? What constitutes a “regular topology”?

Thanks,
Acee


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

Reply via email to