Re: [Idr] draft-head-idr-bgp-ls-isis-fr-01 - WG adoption call (6/6 to 6/20)

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Dear Les,

I have two final questions on this:

on such a mundane topic.
>

Would IDR keeping their WG policy in place and mandating two interoperable
implementations and decent industry support make this topic a little bit
less *mundane* ?

If someone actually has an alternative proposal with some detail – that
> would be interesting.
>

This proposal to send LSDB across N nodes should come from and within LSR
WG as we are talking about LSR protocols. Why IDR is even cc-ed and LSR WG
is not beats me.

Why can't LSR WG not come with IMP - IGP Monitoring Protocol ?

Thx,
R.

PS. Actually the way I read Jeff's note was very positive and extended help
to LSR WG to make the process seamless. But it seems some folks apparently
think this is all done - do not waste our time - You IDR-ers take what we
produce in ISIS and OSPF to BGP forever. That's pretty cool indeed :)  And
another LSR WG member and ex-chair says if you do not take it we will squat
codepoints and do it anyway ... so you have no choice. Bravo !