Hi Wendy, Another good observation. If I remember the intension, the "omission" was intentional. Given your feedback, I think we should add a sentence to say that ECS has internal implementation flexibility, using publicly announced network/cost maps, internal maps, or other mechanisms.
Richard On Jul 26, 2013 2:05 PM, "Wendy Roome" <[email protected]> wrote: > Does it make sense to allow an Endpoint Cost Service (ECS) resource to > "use" a Network Map resource? > > If it does, then that ECS is equivalent resolving the endpoints to PIDs > with that map, and getting the costs from the associated cost map. > > But if an ECS resource does not "use" a network map, then that ECS is > based on some unspecified source of cost data. It might use one of the > network & cost maps, or it might use some other mechanism altogether. > > As far as I can tell, the current draft doesn't say anything about this -- > it neither forbids nor requires an ECS to depend on a network map. The > only guideline is that the ECS example in {8.5.4} doesn't have a "uses" > attribute. But I wasn't sure if that omission was intentional. > > - Wendy Roome > > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
