Re: [CCAMP] Last Call for OTN Routing and Signaling Drafts

Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Wed, 08 August 2012 08:34 UTC

Return-Path: <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A201511E80E1 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 01:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.028, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0ODeUpVFmGTA for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 01:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F53711E80D5 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 01:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7fd66d0000004ad-9e-5022248de880
Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id E9.CA.01197.D8422205; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 10:34:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.63]) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.93]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 10:34:11 +0200
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 10:34:09 +0200
Thread-Topic: Last Call for OTN Routing and Signaling Drafts
Thread-Index: Ac106YTWFkimJqV8Romx8WJ8TrxrywAViQAQ
Message-ID: <B5630A95D803744A81C51AD4040A6DAA2346829856@ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se>
References: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A5A9667A34@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> <502190CA.9050305@labn.net> <ED393A2A-5ACE-4529-A529-EAD0A334139A@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <ED393A2A-5ACE-4529-A529-EAD0A334139A@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW6vilKAwcXz0hZP5txgsdi+cwmL xZy7zhYdzW9ZHFg8XvbPYfRYsuQnk8f1pqvsHh82NbMFsERx2aSk5mSWpRbp2yVwZWyYuoix 4IhQxb2Da1kbGJ/zdTFyckgImEi82riUBcIWk7hwbz1bFyMXh5DAKUaJX6fXMEE48xklzv3f wtrFyMHBJmAl8eSQD0iDiICLxPpnGxhBbGYBP4mfu46zgdgsAioSN69MABsqLGAt8W7GJRaI ehuJSR2NzCBjRASMJK5NEwYJ8wqES+w/cAusREhgHqPElWuRIDangL3Ej1NvmEFsRgFZiQm7 F0GtEpe49WQ+E8TNAhJL9pxnhrBFJV4+/scKUS8j8WvTN1aIej2JG1OnsEHY2hLLFr5mhtgr KHFy5hOWCYxis5CMnYWkZRaSlllIWhYwsqxiFM5NzMxJLzfUSy3KTC4uzs/TK07dxAiMr4Nb fuvuYDx1TuQQozQHi5I4L1fSfn8hgfTEktTs1NSC1KL4otKc1OJDjEwcnFINjGkL/Ho+VK3N M1yxfU2kbQjbcb9ZjRceuG3PCt73JUCYM3ai9g5rifMdmzhFrl71+HLm9xoFb7eSII4TJkfy HDPqlnhPO8wtIPgqOKdU5MVd0U2z+d8tNzJJuWK6K2V5VfKUxS/l1n05lBZ85ctJXi23gECP q8e8qm7X7G2cr62nZshryf7ophJLcUaioRZzUXEiAJ2dn659AgAA
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>, "dbrungard@att.com" <dbrungard@att.com>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Last Call for OTN Routing and Signaling Drafts
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 08:34:23 -0000

John, Lou,

Agree on the stability of routing and signaling but maybe the framework and info model should be last called before them. What about 1 month for the first couple and 2 for the second one? Possibly 1 month is enough for the all of them but it could be better to give the WG more time for a carefully LC review.

A new version of the FWK needs to be issued soon addressing your comment on the backward compatibility issue (MAY vs MUST)

Thanks,
Daniele

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 
>On Behalf Of John E Drake
>Sent: mercoledì 8 agosto 2012 0.11
>To: Lou Berger
>Cc: ccamp@ietf.org; dbrungard@att.com
>Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Last Call for OTN Routing and Signaling Drafts
>
>Lou,
>
>Yes it is and I'm sorry for my late response.  I would check 
>with Daniele and Fatai but I would hope within a month.  We 
>have been working on these for quite some time and they seem 
>quite stable.
>
>Thanks,
>
>John
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Aug 7, 2012, at 6:03 PM, "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>
>> John,
>>    I take it that this message is in response to:
>> 
>> On 8/3/2012 5:14 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
>>> Subject: [CCAMP] For discussion: Planned milestone update 
>Dec 2012 - 
>>> Submit G.709 enhancements framework for IESG
> review
>>> Dec 2012 - Submit G.709 enhancements solutions for IESG review
>> 
>> What date are you proposing?
>> 
>> I generally feel that the milestone date should be an upper 
>limit and 
>> that reaching a milestone early is good, while missing one is not.
>> 
>> Lou
>> 
>> On 8/7/2012 5:56 PM, John E Drake wrote:
>>> Lou and Deborah,
>>> 
>>> Given that we expeditiously address the remaining small number of 
>>> issues in the OTN Routing and Signaling drafts, is there any reason 
>>> why we need to wait until the next IETF meeting to initiate a Last 
>>> Call on them?  As has been pointed out many times, a WG's work is 
>>> done on its mailing list and not in its face-to-face meetings.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> John
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>_______________________________________________
>CCAMP mailing list
>CCAMP@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>