RE: Proposed response to the Liaison Statement on LMP Link Verifi cation

Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net> Tue, 29 April 2003 19:25 UTC

Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com
Delivery-date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:26:47 +0000
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:25:28 -0700
From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
cc: sob@harvard.edu, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, "Ron Bonica (E-mail)" <Ronald.P.Bonica@wcom.com>, zinin@psg.com, Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
Subject: RE: Proposed response to the Liaison Statement on LMP Link Verifi cation
Message-ID: <20030429121108.M6900@kummer.juniper.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"

Okay, this thread seems to be going nowhere.

I will formulate a liaison statement in reply to T1X1 regarding
draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh and post it to this list.

In response, I would like folks to state (preferably publicly)
whether they think that the reply is reasonable [ship it], or
*explicit text* for changes.  No theoretical arguments, we can
do those in the ITU-T Q.14/15 interim meeting.

If we cannot achieve rough consensus within a week of my posting
the liaison (ETA, this weekend), I will throw up my hands and pass
the buck to the Liaison Coordinator and the ADs.

Kireeti.