On 7/24/11 12:32 PM, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
If the equipment doesn't support IS-IS, then you can't expect it to support IS-IS MT ;)
;)
Anyway, making IS-IS mandatory makes absolutely no sense; it's rarely used in Enterprise environments.
What we could do is to change the current requirement into "If the equipment supports IS-IS routing protocol, it MUST support IS-IS MT ..." (don’t cut/paste, use the wording from the document ;)
hmm... I think we should not say "If equipment supports", as *we* are writing document defining what equipment must and should support. ;) Probably it would be a good thing to say something like: "If IS-IS [RFC5308] is requested, then IS-IS MT must be supported" or maybe we just move from optional to mandatory this section: "When IS-IS routing protocol is requested, the equipment SHOULD support "M-ISIS: Multi-Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] (highly recommended)" ...change the first word "When" to "If" and remove "(highly recommended)" :) What do you guys think? /jan