Re: [RPRWG] RFC 2892; The Cisco SRP MAC Layer Protocol
Most of us are against it and prefer a purely distributed environment.
Khaled Amer
President, AmerNet Inc.
Architecture Analysis and Performance Modeling Specialists
Address: 13711 Solitaire Way, Irvine, CA 92620
Phone: (949)552-1114 Fax: (949)552-1116
e-mail: khaledamer@xxxxxxx
Web: www.performancemodeling.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Zeisz <Zeisz@xxxxxxxx>
To: <dbrown@xxxxxxxxxx>; <stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 6:53 AM
Subject: RE: [RPRWG] RFC 2892; The Cisco SRP MAC Layer Protocol
>
> Do the .17 objectives prevent the election of a master? Clearly requiring
a
> specific node to be on the ring and be the master would not be a good
design
> point; however, it seems that having a process like 802.5's Active/Standby
> monitor election may not be a terrible thing to have.
> Has there been any direction set on this?
>
>
> Ray Zeisz
> Technology Advisor
> LVL7 Systems
> http://www.LVL7.com
> (919) 865-2735
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dbrown@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dbrown@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 4:54 PM
> To: stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: [RPRWG] RFC 2892; The Cisco SRP MAC Layer Protocol
>
>
>
> After reading through RFC2892, it is not clear to me how each node
> "discovers" which interface is on which ring (i.e. inner or outer).
>
> I'm not suggesting we follow this implementation, but I am curious how the
> assignment is done.
>
> It could be done with a master device, but I believe that goes against
one
> of our objectives, I'd know if they were posted:)
>
> It could be hard coded, but that might limit flexibility.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Brown
> Chief Architect
> MOSAID Semiconductor
> (613) 599-9539