Off list. In message <4e96d145.5090...@riw.us> Russ White writes: > > > At various jobs I pulled 10base2 coax, then 10base5 coax, then twisted > > pair. [Well someone pulled it, but not me.] Anyone remember vampire > > taps in 10base2? What a reliability headache! > > Pulled from cable hanging in a "plenum" in a secure building... Because > there was no way to get cable floor to floor other than through that > single shaft. For a Xerox Star system. Then there was the token bus for > the little Novell network over in legal --another disaster. <blech>
I managed to avoid token ring and novell. > > Back on topic: I do think we should consider OSPF (not so keen on > > ISIS, but OK) and should not rule out OLSRv2 or other LLN related work > > and MANET work (though I'm far from an expert on LLN or MANET). > > IS-IS is easier to get to "zero config," and it's actually simpler in > operation... Which is why I brought it up. :-) I've used both. Why do you think ISIS is simpler in operation? Because people love to deal with NSAPs? > > We will have to extend OSPF to make zero config possible. The > > extensions should be completely backwards compatible if at all > > possible. > > Yes, I agree... Or we need w new wired/wireless protocol that jumps both > worlds, and would actually be acceptable and implemented by a large > number of vendors. But that's another entire problem space... We agree on something. That's good. :-) The clueless vendor problem space is a tough one. > :-) > > Russ Curtis _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
