[bmwg] Updates to MPLS Protection Meth/Term draft- Request for comments/review

BMWG-ers,

The updated drafts (term is still in the process of being published) for the
MPLS Protection benchmarking work item has been submitted. Please review the
drafts, and post any comments on the mailing list. I am providing brief
overview of the changes done to the latest versions by the team in the light
of comments received during the previous meeting and subsequently:

Highlights of the latest versions:

1. draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-01.txt (
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-01.txt>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-01.txt)

1.	

	Shortened the Abstract to make it more to the point 
2.	

	Refined, and edited Introduction to improve the flow of the
document, and rearranged the paragraphs. 
3.	

	Editorial review of the entire version-00, and made changes to the
text 
4.	

	Deleted figure 4.9 and edited section 5.5 to reduce the number of
test cases to 2 
5.	

	New boilerplate changes 
6.	

	Attempted to address the discussion from the previous meeting -
"Duration of Failure" vs "Time taken for pakets to be switched to backup
path", and hence added 1) packet based loss method 2) Time based loss method
for computing failover times. 

     Note: We seek input from the list on recommendations for the Packet
sampling interval since section 3.2.5 of
draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-12.txt suggests sampling interval of
100ms, which for MPLS FRR scenarios is  high. 

 2. draft-itef-bmwg-protection-term-01.txt (
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-01.txt>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-01.txt) 
  a. No major changes from the previous version
  b. new boilerplate changes 

We look forward to active discussions on the mailing list. 

Regards,

MPLS Protection Benchmarking Author Team