Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/3] Proposal for VRF-lite

From: David Ahern <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 08:21:06 -0600

Hi Nicolas:

On 6/9/15 2:58 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> I'm not really in favor of the name 'vrf'. This term is very
> controversial and
> having a consensus of what is/contains a 'vrf' is quite impossible.
> There was already a lot of discussions about this topic on quagga ml
> that show
> that everybody has a different opinion about this term ;-)

Are you referring to this thread?
https://lists.quagga.net/pipermail/quagga-dev/2014-November/011795.html

I could see differing opinions regarding the implementation of a VRF; is 
there really a controversy on what a VRF is?

David