> The addition of the RCM module is architecture The existence of RCM and the RCM module framework is architecture; whether we choose to implement a new RCM module to solve a given problem seems like an implementation detail to me.
> misconfiguration of VNICs in use by VRRP. Weighing the cost of > introducing an RCM module against the benefit of preventing an edge case > is likely a judgment call, which is why this discussion has dragged on. The only architectural matters I see here are the semantics of rename and DR in the presence of VRRP. We should reach agreement on what those should be and leave it to the project team to decide how to implement those semantics. Of course, if the project team feels the advised semantics are too onerous, then more discussion is warranted -- but that does not seem to be the case here. -- meem
