Layer 2 Switching Caps LSPs

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sun, 23 January 2005 18:00 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 NAA28006 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:00:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CsmIU-0007LY-Bi for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:17:16 -0500
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1Csluc-000BpN-Up for ccamp-data@psg.com; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:52:34 +0000
Received: from [62.241.163.7] (helo=blaster.systems.pipex.net) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CsluZ-000Bor-Ad for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:52:31 +0000
Received: from dnni.com (81-178-2-190.dsl.pipex.com [81.178.2.190]) by blaster.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80E7CE000387 for <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:52:21 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from Puppy ([212.43.203.48] RDNS failed) by dnni.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:51:34 +0000
Message-ID: <008a01c50174$67e76820$d2cb2bd4@Puppy>
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Layer 2 Switching Caps LSPs
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:46:16 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2005 17:51:34.0402 (UTC) FILETIME=[2DAC2E20:01C50174]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on psg.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.1
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

All,

There is a draft (draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-l2sc-lsp-03.txt) that we
have discussed at several of the more recent CCAMP meetings, and have
decided that the subject is within scope for our charter.

The questions we have faced have been:
- is the problem well enough articulated?
- is this the solution that the WG wants to pursue?
- is there a high enough level of interest in this work?

If the answer to all three questions is "yes" then we can adopt the draft
as a WG document and move forwards.

Note: I think there are a large number of minor issues to clear up with
this draft, but hopefully this is orthogonal to whether we make this a WG
draft or not.

Thanks,
Adrian