[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft-bhatia-manral-diff-isis-ospf-01.txt

Subject: Re: draft-bhatia-manral-diff-isis-ospf-01.txt
From: "Tom Petch"
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 12:17:35 +0200
I agree there is a need for a document that meets the aims of this one, but do
not believe that this is yet it:-)

I find it goes straight into a level of detail which I may or may not agree
with, depending on the unstated context.  I find it telling that while RFC2328
and RFC2740 are listed in the references, they are never cited in the body of
the document, that is you never say what you mean by OSPF, which of the RFC you
include. Where IS-IS is concerned, I recall a liaison (which I cannot currently
locate) specifying which aspects of IS-IS the IETF would standardise and which
would be standardised elsewhere, that is, there is work progressing on it
elsewhere; you have a reference to the ITU, my recollection is that it was ISO..

Section 4 illustrates my problem with OSPF.  Entitled 'Interface types', it is
mostly about network types and modes.  RFC2328 specificies three network types
of which non-broadcast can run in two modes, P2MP or NBMA, and I have always
liked this classification. But I now find that many people are using the
terminology from Cisco's IOS which I can never reconcile with the RFC, so for
me, this is a confused area where you should say more about what you mean by the
terminology.  And again in this section, the terminology switches from the
abstract to PVC to ATM, leaving me wondering why; when you refer to PVC, are you
implicitly excluding networks that use SVC or do not have VC at all?

So, to coin a phrase, I would like more of 'stating the obvious' since I then
would know whether or not I agree with you in the detail.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Manav Bhatia" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:27 AM
Subject: draft-bhatia-manral-diff-isis-ospf-01.txt

> Hi,
> The increasing popularity of IS-IS and OSPF over the years has drawn
> significant attention to the relative merits and de-merits of one with
> respect to the other. We have written a draft that presents an elaborate
> comparison between the two routing protocols to explain how the features and
> functionalities of one differs from the other. Wherever applicable the
> differences between OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 have also been pointed out. This draft
> was written over a period of time and has been contributed to by a lot of
> people.
> The URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bhatia-manral-diff-isis-ospf-01.tx
> t
> Please let us know if you have any comments.
> Thanks,
> Manav
> --
> Manav Bhatia
> Member of Technical Staff
> Riverstone Networks, Inc.
> http://www.riverstonenet.com
> _______________________________________________
> Rtgwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>