> Second, the question of whether we need to support MPLS, per se, or not
> is an important one. There are lots of things that routers can do at
> line rate, but because they can do something at line rate is not enough
> reason to require that the new architecture support that thing. Current
> implementation abilities ought not drive the development of requirements.
> In other words, we should require what is needed, not what we can currently
> do.
i thought we were doing layer three routing, not layer two switching. if
the latter, then we have to cover frame relay, atm, mpls, ethernet, ...
i think we will have more than enough work if we stick to the internet
protocols and packets.
randy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:03 EDT