Re: [CCAMP] Nit in CCAMP minutes

Adrian,

Your corrections have been posted.  Any additional corrections would be
most welcome!

Lou

On 8/19/2013 10:24 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The minutes for items 20 and 21 show me saying:
> 
>> Adrian Farrel: AD hat off - My name appears on applicability I-D, but not on
> the use
>> cases. This is not an accident, if we go for option 1 fine, if we go for
> option 2 I would
>> not support. I do not think the approach is good or even possible. This is not
> how we
>> should build networks.
> 
> This is an unfortunate reversal of what I said.
> At around minute 56 of the audio file
> https://www.ietf.org/audio/ietf87/ietf87-potsdam1-20130731-1300-pm1.mp3 you can
> hear me say...
> 
> "AD hat off - My name appears on applicability I-D, but not on the use cases.
> This is not an accident. If we were to go for option 1 I would have severe
> problems. I'm definitely an option 2 person, so I can be in favour of one
> document and opposed to the other. I don't think the ONI approach is good or
> desirable. I don't like the mechanism proposed for sharing routing information.
> It's not that I see the UNI definition as being you must, must not share routing
> information, I just don't see that that's the way we should build networks."
> 
> Later on in the same section I am reported as saying:
> 
>> Adrian Farrel: 
> 
> Which is perhaps a little terse :-)
> 
> The audio records...
> 
> "The enhanced mode in L1VPN recognised there was function there, but didn't need
> to call it any other special type of interface. It was just two networks talking
> to each other."
> 
> 
> I'm not asking for a verbatim record (I like the way the minutes are reported as
> salient points not a transcript), but I would like the initial point sorted out
> a bit, please.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> 
> 
> 
> 