[rbridge] Consensus Check: Point to Point links
Caitlin.Bestler at neterion.com
Wed Oct 3 11:17:42 PDT 2007
Joe Touch wrote:
> I concur with Eric. My concern is why we are defining behavior
> to pt-pt links for rbridges when they are not similarly defined for
> general 802.11 networks.
> If there is such a definition, we should point to it, but we should
> create our own. There's no unique need.
I can imagine several scenarios where there is a truly safe
link between two RBridges, and it is indeed safe for them to use a
tunneling between them.
What I don't see is why they need the specification to give them
If that link is *truly* and securely point-to-point they could just as
declare themselves to be a single RBridge and said link to be a
bus". When an RBridge is implemented on multiple processors the IETF
specify the bus that connects them.
So basically, whenever this sort of optimized encapsulation is valid
no need to explicitly state so. If there is a need for the alternate
to be officially blessed then it probably means that it isn't safe to do
If *nobody* else can see the optimized frames then who is there to
that they are non-compliant?
More information about the rbridge