[rbridge] Tie breaking in trees

[Donald Eastlake]

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Radia Perlman<Radia.Perlman at sun.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> **********
> An alternative would be to replace a) with:
>
> a) most preferred are those established by P2P Hellos. If there
> are one or more of those, R1 is allowed to transmit on any of those,
> and R2 is required to accept from any of those.

I prefer this alternative. It is safe to multipath multi-destination
frames across parallel one-hop links that are configured to be P2P. So
I see no reason to add complexity at the receiver by requiring to it
reject such frames on all but one of such P2P links.

Thanks,
Donald