RE: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt

["Lin, Zhi-Wei (Zhi)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

Actually the work been done in the ITU-T deals specifically with the overlay, at least the application that operators have identified as been important to them. These documents are planned to be consented at the Jan ITU-T meeting (G.7713.x series). ITU-T has communicated to the IETF regarding this work for some time now (I'm bad at remembering dates but you can probably trace back the emails or the liaison statements).

In addition, I have submitted two I-Ds, one on requirements and another on protocol extensions needed to support the overlay. It is my understanding that the protocol extensions document has passed through IESG review and sent off to the RFC editors already?

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rqts-00.txt

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rsvpte-04.txt


You can see the status of the ...rsvpte-04 document from the IESG status tracker
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi

Zhi



-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Narayanan [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 3:30 PM
To: Kireeti Kompella
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt


I would vote that this should be considered in some guise or other in
the WG. It answers a specific set of questions in a certain way - "how
can I do GMPLS-style optical signaling without exposing so much peering
information". AFAIK there aren't CCAMP WG documents that deal with this
issue in a specific manner.

-Ashok


On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 14:39, Kireeti Kompella wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a call for consensus to make the above document a CCAMP WG
> document.  This call will end Dec 17, 2002.
> 
> Please indicate your opinion by replying to this email.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kireeti.
> 
>