RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status
"zafar ali" <zali@cisco.com> Tue, 10 August 2004 17:26 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 NAA14608 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:26:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BuaTA-0000w5-MR for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:31:29 -0400
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1BuaER-0007NX-FB for ccamp-data@psg.com; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:16:15 +0000
Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1BuaEG-0007Lo-Ou for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:16:04 +0000
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (64.102.124.13) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2004 13:24:39 -0400
X-BrightmailFiltered: true
Received: from zaliw2k01 (rtp-vpn2-374.cisco.com [10.82.241.118]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i7AHG0A6010791; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:16:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: zafar ali <zali@cisco.com>
To: dpapadimitriou@psg.com, dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
Cc: 'Adrian Farrel' <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, 'Kireeti Kompella' <kireeti@juniper.net>, 'Tove Madsen' <Tove.Madsen@acreo.se>
Subject: RE: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:17:31 -0400
Organization: Cisco Systems
Message-ID: <001701c47efd$ec93a060$0200a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.5709
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <41190054.3020407@psg.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on psg.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.64
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7da5a831c477fb6ef97f379a05fb683c
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Dimitri, Thanks for the clarification; I remembered the discussion but was not 100% sure of the final take. Given this, as I mentioned earlier, I am "in favor" of this document to be a WG ID. Thanks Regards... Zafar >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org >[mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of dimitri papadimitriou >Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 1:05 PM >To: zafar ali >Cc: 'Adrian Farrel'; ccamp@ops.ietf.org; 'Kireeti Kompella'; >'Tove Madsen' >Subject: Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status > > >zafar, > >the point has been already asked during the meeting, to summarize, the >basic idea: > >- is to have a "decoder ring" for understanding ITU work and IETF work > (-> for publication as informational RFC only) > >- is NOT to define anything in this document as the intention is first > to understand the two groups work efforts and then do a series of > liaisons to determine/assess if any additional work is needed > >hope this clarifies, > >thanks, >- dimitri. > >--- >zafar ali wrote: > >> "yes" to (1), (3) and (4), >> >> Conditional "yes" to draft-aboulmagd-ccamp-transport-lmp-02.txt, >> depending on the answer to the following: >> >> Does Author plan to address link management solution space between >> ASON and GMPLS in the same document? I would prefer that and >in which >> case I think adaptation of this document as a WG document to >be deferred to a later >> point. >> >> Thanks >> >> Regards... Zafar >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org >>>[mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel >>>Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 8:52 AM >>>To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org >>>Cc: 'Kireeti Kompella'; Tove Madsen >>>Subject: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status >>> >>> >>>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). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> . >> >
- 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