Robert Raszuk wrote:
It seems to me just like section 4.2.4.3 Hello Contents of the above
draft says there is sufficiently large number of optional information
usable for TRILL which could be added to today's ISIS header that
perhaps it may make sense to just define it as separate TRILL-Hello msg.
My point was that in the same time the padding issue would be solved
yet a lot of already available code for L3 ISIS could be reused.
so we have now separate L2-encaps, separate IIH, separate LSP and
separate SNP PDUs
- all of that with changed semantics ...
sounds to me much more like a new protocol, than something vendors can
integrate
in their existing IS-IS implementation.
if we want to further walk down that road, we should name the beast
TRILL-something
and drop the isis-wg groups involvement, since this is not IS-IS any more.
/hannes