On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 22:33 -0400, Peter Memishian wrote: > > > Understood. Specific for this case, I will let Seb decide whether/how to > > > provide the backwards bfu support for MAC-type plugin bits. > > > > I don't see how it will be possible to make backward bfu work in this > > case unless we want to forever entrench the construct aggr0/<key> into > > the configuration file syntax as opposed to the proposed aggr<key>. If > > someone can come up with an idea, please let me know. > > Usually, we've built this logic into BFU -- e.g., it could notice that a > backward BFU is being done, and convert the file back to its old format. > Later on, once we've crossed the "backward BFU grace period", the stuff > can be hauled out of BFU. >
Hmm, that's true, it could be done that way. I'll see if I can do that. -Seb _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
