Re: CCAMP 56 agenda

"Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com> Sun, 02 March 2003 20:53 UTC

Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com
Delivery-date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 12:57:11 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030302155254.087f36c8@bucket.cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 15:53:29 -0500
To: Adrian Farrel <afarrel@movaz.com>, Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: CCAMP 56 agenda
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"

>Kireeti,
>The following drafts are candidates for discussion...
>
>GMPLS MIBs
>draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-00.txt
>draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-00.txt
>I am not particularly keen to say anything on this subject, but perhaps the WG
>is owed a statement on the progress (or lack of it).

         Not sure there is a reason to discuss this as part of the
agenda other than to say that these MIBs are awaiting updates
of the base MPLS MIBs.

         --Tom


>Crankback
>draft-iwata-mpls-crankback-05.txt
>Would like to get this draft into a WG even though it has more technical 
>work to
>be done.
>Rumor has it that inter-area will finally make it onto the CCAMP charter!
>The issue of crankback is raised by the ITU in ASON, and this might start to
>address their requirements.
>
>Route exclusion
>draft-lee-ccamp-rsvp-te-exclude-route-01.txt
>Route exclusion is also, perhaps, ripe for consideration. It has application
>both in single and multi-area networks.
>
>Cheers,
>Adrian
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kireeti Kompella" <kireeti@juniper.net>
>To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
>Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 12:55 AM
>Subject: CCAMP 56 agenda
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > If you would like to speak at the CCAMP WG at the 56th IETF, please
> > reply to this email -- that will help the chairs track requests.
> > Also, please state which Internet draft(s) form the basis of the
> > talk that others may come prepared.
> >
> > Note: these are *not* presentations, expositions, or tutorials.
> > A small number of slides that say what has changed *since the
> > last IETF*, issues that were raised in the interim, and resolutions
> > to those issues is the ideal.  If there hasn't been a discussion
> > on the mailing list, in many cases that is a sign that the topic
> > isn't (yet) ready for prime time.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ron and Kireeti.
> >