Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status
Greg Bernstein <gregbern@yahoo.com> Wed, 11 August 2004 22:44 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28023 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:44:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv1uT-0005w3-75 for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:49:31 -0400
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bv1Yx-000HFS-Vk for ccamp-data@psg.com; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:27:15 +0000
Received: from [216.109.118.113] (helo=web60302.mail.yahoo.com) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bv1Ym-000HAo-21 for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:27:04 +0000
Message-ID: <20040811222703.3809.qmail@web60302.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [218.18.234.61] by web60302.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:27:03 PDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:27:03 -0700
From: Greg Bernstein <gregbern@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Cc: 'Kireeti Kompella' <kireeti@juniper.net>, Tove Madsen <Tove.Madsen@acreo.se>
In-Reply-To: <01ca01c47eec$e7f43760$2e849ed9@Puppy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on psg.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_RFCI autolearn=no version=2.64
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 10d3e4e3c32e363f129e380e644649be
Yes to the LMP draft. Hopefully this can lead to a "common view". The others sound reasonable and probably less controversial. Greg B. --- Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > In San Diego we had four drafts for immediate > consideration as working group drafts. > (There were a few other drafts that needed a little > attention first, but will come up for > consideration in the near future.) > > Please send your comments to the list or to the > chairs. A brief "yes" or "no" will > suffice, but a reason with any "no" would be > helpful. > > Thanks, > Adrian > > > 1. Loose Path Re-optimization > draft-vasseur-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-02.txt > This draft is stable and has an implementation. > The work is predominantly pertinent to inter-domain > signaling, but could also be used > within a domain. > The meeting in San Diego reported relatively few as > having read the draft, but no > objection to it becoming a WG draft. > > 2. A Transport Network View of LMP > draft-aboulmagd-ccamp-transport-lmp-02.txt > There has been a bit of off-list discussion about > this draft in which it has become clear > that there are definite differences between the ASON > and CCAMP uses and views of LMP. This > is precisely what the draft is intended to expose. > That is, the draft is not intended to > unify the views of LMP, but rather to represent the > two views within a single document so > as to highlight the differences. > In San Diego, no-one raised objections to this being > a WG draft. > > 3. Graceful restart > draft-aruns-ccamp-rsvp-restart-ext-01.txt > This draft represents a merger of two previous > drafts and was created at the specific > request of the WG in Seoul. > There is some more editorial work to be done on the > draft, but the main technical content > appears to be stable. > In San Diego there was some support and no > opposition to this becoming a WG draft. > > 4. Inter-domain Framework > draft-farrel-ccamp-inter-domain-framework-01.txt > ** I am principal editor. Please take any issues > with this to Kireeti ** > This draft provides a framework for the multi-domain > solutions work that the WG is > chartered to address. > In San Diego there were some questions about whether > the draft should be extended to cover > other, more complex, inter-domain functions. There > was no conclusion about whether this > should be done before or after becoming a WG draft > (if it should be done at all). > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… zafar ali
- Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status Adrian Farrel
- RE : Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG s… LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Igor Bryskin
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… dimitri papadimitriou
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… zafar ali
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Don Fedyk
- LMP transport [Was: Re: Soliciting comments on mo… Adrian Farrel
- RE: LMP transport [Was: Re: Soliciting comments o… zafar ali
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Jean Philippe Vasseur
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… dimitri papadimitriou
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Richard Rabbat
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… John Drake
- Re-opt [Was: Re: Soliciting comments on moving dr… Adrian Farrel
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Richard Rabbat
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Greg Bernstein
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Don Fedyk
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Jean Philippe Vasseur
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Don Fedyk
- Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… dimitri papadimitriou
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Richard Rabbat
- RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG st… Richard Rabbat