RE: RE: AD request / L2 Triggers Chapter Statement

>===== Original Message From James Carlson <[email protected]> 
=====
>Phil Neumiller writes:
>> [Vern Schryver wrote]
>> > I suppose instead you want your L2 triggers to reach through IP to
>> > TCP to suggest that TCP do or stop doing or otherwise change.  Don't
>> > you know that people have been doing such things for decades without
>> > the let, leave, or hindrance of the IETF?
>>
>> Yes, precisely WHY it needs to be STANDARDIZED!!! You are making
>> my point for me.  Thanks!
>
>Sure, I can see why having interface standards would be nice, but
>then, why the IETF at all?  Internal implementation details really
>don't seem to me to be the domain of folks engineering protocols for
>the Internet itself.
>
>This seems more appropriate for The Open Group or some other such OS
>interfaces standardization body.

I don't see how these triggers can be classified as internal implementation
details.
If these triggers are used in routing decisions, as they might be in
mobile IP or MANET scenarions, then why should it be an OS standard?
It makes sense to me that the there should be clear interfaces to 
IP on "both sides" of the IP stack.
Or am I missing something?


Einar 



_______________________________________________
pilc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pilc
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pilc-charter.html
http://pilc.grc.nasa.gov/