Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!boulder!recnews
From: Greg Satz <satz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: backplane backbone, routing or bridging? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Jun 91 13:06:43 PDT."
             <9106242006.AA28369@cincsac.arc.nasa.gov> 
Message-ID: <9106250555.AA23713@wolf.cisco.com>
Sender: news@colorado.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 24 Jun 91 22:57:43 MDT
Return-Path: <cisco-request@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Lines: 15

>> 
>> I'll point out that you don't need OSI, just OSPF with variable length
>> subnet mask support in the IP forwarder.  Several vendors already do this.
>> It's not rocket science, and routing technology has surpassed the 
>> point where such restrictions are required.  Subnets no longer need to
>> be connected if you do things right.
>> 
>> 						Thanks,
>> 						   Milo

Milo, when is the IETF going to write up how variable length subnet masks
should be used? There are a number of situations where unexpected behavior
can occur. Is everyone expected to learn this for themselves?

Greg