[rbridge] per-VLAN instances of IS-IS

[Anoop Ghanwani]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Gray (LO/EUS) [mailto:eric.gray at ericsson.com] 
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 6:59 AM
> To: Anoop Ghanwani
> Cc: rbridge at postel.org; Radia Perlman
> Subject: RE: [rbridge] per-VLAN instances of IS-IS
>
> > I don't know too many midrange routers that are capable of 
> supporting 
> > 4K adjacencies.  I do know several midrange switches that are 
> > perfectly capable of supporting all 4K VLANs and mapping 
> them to MST 
> > instances.

> I also have made the (somewhat subtle) point that the concept 
> of "adjacencies" in soft-state protocols is not quite the 
> scalability issue that you think it is.

And I just don't get it.

> Thus, my argument is that your concerns are not a problem we 
> need to solve.
> 
> In a rational discussion, it IS NOT necessary for a person to 
> prove that a problem does not need to be solved.  Otherwise, 
> it would be possible to endlessly stall rational discussions 
> with arbitrary "problems" 
> and a supposed "necessity" to establish that none of them 
> need to be solved.
> 
> In any rational discussion, it IS necessary to show that 
> there is a point in pursuing resolution of any specific issue 
> or problem.  Otherwise, it would be likely that any rational 
> discussion would quickly become pointless.
> 
> Hence, it is necessary for you to prove that your specific 
> problem is in fact an issue that we need to address and it is 
> not necessary for me to prove that it is not.
> 
> So far, you have simply asserted that there is an issue with 
> scalability that we need to solve.
> 
> Prove it. 

I don't have much more to offer in terms of argument
other than what I already have.  So we'll just have
to disagree on this matter.

Anoop