Subject: Capabilities Summary - Issue #2

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 93 15:35:27 PDT

To all -

    Attached below is the latest Capabilities Summary.  I've included the
    following changes submitted over the past week:
	(1) 3Com wants loop prevention as an option,
	(2) Cayman clarified the base set for me and added name server
	    as an option
	(3) Eicon wants only TCP for capabilities exchange and wants
	    a directory service to be an option.
	(4) Cisco's Base + Option Set request.

    Also, as I have been wrestling with the ambiguity between DLSw (the
    informational RFC) and DLSw (the working group standard).
    Sometimes, you can't say just "DLSw".  You have to place it in
    context.  What do others feel about calling the standard we're
    working on "ODLS" for Open Data Link Switching (analogous to OSPF)
    versus DLSw for the current Data Link Switching.  Since the
    standardization process is under the auspices of an open
    multivendor group, the term "open" seems appropriate.

    One last thing: I'll be out on vacation from July 28 thru August 2.
    Rick Konlon will be filling in for me while I'm away.

Thanks,
-----------
Wayne Clark
cisco Systems, Inc.
[email-masked]
415/688-4627


			    Open DLSw (ODLS)

			  Capabilities SIGlet

			     Feature List

		    Tue Jul 27 14:38:26 PDT 1993

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	Base Set vs. Option Sets
    Description:	What features in ODLS should be base requirements for
			interoperability and which ones should be optional.
    Member Input:
	Cayman		Base   = RFC 1434 + capab exchng + flow control
			Option = name server
	Novell		Option = NetBIOS support
	Eicon		Base   = (today's) DLSw (i.e. default capabilities)
	3Com		Option = loop prevention
	Eicon		Option = directory service
	Cisco		Base   = RFC 1434 + capab exchng + MIB
			Option = flow control, NetBIOS, loop prevention,
				 list of known ODLS routers, 
				 CANUREACH / ICANREACH, priority / COS
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	Vendor Id
    Description:	Include a vendor id, vendor release number, etc. in
			the capabilities exchange.
    Member Input:
	Cisco		Vendor id is a good thing.
	Wellfleet	Wary about vendor id.
	Proteon		Vendor id is a good thing.  Aids in problem det.
	Cayman		Don't like vendor id.  Invites variations.
	Hypercom	Vendor id is a good thing.  Aids in problem det.
	Novell		Vendor id is a good thing.  Good for troubleshooting.
	Eicon		Vendor id is a good thing.  Ignoring it is ok.
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	TCP vs. UDP for Capabilities Exchange
    Description:	Transport of the capabilities across TCP or UDP.
    Member Input:
	Cisco		TCP or UDP, with a preference for UDP.
	Novell		TCP only.  For reasons of alternate transport.
	BBN		TCP only.  For reasons of alternate transport.
	Wellfleet	TCP only.  Use another SSP message within TCP.
	Cayman		TCP only.  Use another SSP message within TCP.
	Hypercom	Leaning toward UDP.
	Ascom/T-plex	TCP only.  Use another SSP message within TCP.
			Concerned about requiring IP multicast.
	Eicon		TCP only.
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	Data Stream Format
    Description:	How should the capabilities exchange data stream
			be formatted?
    Member Input:
	Cisco		GDS format (i.e. LLID).
	Novell		Reserved bytes in message header.
	Cayman		Tag / length. (i.e. like GDS = editor note)
	Hypercom	GDS format (i.e. LLID).
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	Optional CANUREACH / ICANREACH
    Description:	Should CUR/ICR be optional at connection startup?
    Member Input:
	Cisco		They should be optional.  Must be able to send/recv.
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Feature:	Directory Server / Name Server
    Description:	How should ODLS-capable routers find out about each
			other?
    Member Input:
	Radlinx		List of already-known ODLS routers in capabilities
			exchange.
	Hypercom	Name server treading onto APPN turf. Objective, but
			not in the base.
	Cisco		List of already-known ODLS routers in capabilities
			exchange.
	Novell		List of ODLS routers in capabilities exchange.  Don't
			want it link state-based.
	Eicon		Wants a directory server. DS capability in exchange.
    Comments:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

---

From: [email-masked] (S B)
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1993 20:01:44 -0400 (EDT)

I would like to fill in our input.  

Base Set vs. Option Set:   	Base is RFC 1434, options from sig work.

Data Stream Format:		GDS format.	

Directory Server:		Future service to be defined, leave out
				until further investigation.

Also, I am not in favor of changing the name.  We have enough confusion
with names as it is. 

Scott
[email-masked]