Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label-01.txt

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

> It is clear from your response that composite label portion is way beyond the
ITU
> data plane definition as of today. 

I'm sorry I have given you that impression. Sorrier still if the text in the I-D
leaves you with that impression.

It was my intention that this document defined a label that could be used for
the limited form of concatenated slot that is currently defined by the ITU-T.
It was also my intention that the document clearly and unequivocally states that
the label is not for any undefined (by the ITU-T) data plane constructs.
However, I wanted to ensure that the defined label is forward compatible.

> Do you still have reasons for keeping the composite label
> portion in the draft? If not please take it off the WG document.

Well, it is a WG I-D so my reason, as editor, is governed by what the WG wants.
I had formed the opinion, in the run up to WG adoption, that the WG supported
this idea. And before I posted the revised I-D, I circulated the text on the
list, received a couple of comments, and tweaked the text. I don't believe I
heard anyone objecting to the idea at that time.

Perhaps the chairs can help guide us to understand what the WG wants included in
the document.

Thanks,
Adrian