[rbridge] L3 vs. L2 encapsulation

[Radia Perlman]

We've been assuming an L2 encapsulation, and that's what I'd prefer. 
That not only saves room in the header, but
does not a priori require assigning L3 addresses, and also automatically 
supports both IPv4 and IPv6.

Radia

Alper Yegin wrote:

>One of the issues listed in draft-perlman-rbridge-03.txt is the choice
>of encapsulation. See Section 5.5 for a detailed discussion. 
>
>Can we close that issue agreeing to a L3 encapsulation? 
>
>This does not prevent anyone designing a L2 encapsulated version by
>reusing the base spec(s) as much as possible. That should be outside the
>scope of the WG though.
>
>Comments welcome.
>
>Alper
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>rbridge mailing list
>rbridge at postel.org
>http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
>  
>