RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG
"Hamid Ould-Brahim" <hbrahim@nortel.com> Fri, 06 May 2005 15:42 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DU4xr-0004fg-JP; Fri, 06 May 2005 11:42:08 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DU4xp-0004e9-7z; Fri, 06 May 2005 11:42:05 -0400
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 LAA02413; Fri, 6 May 2005 11:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.56] helo=zcars04e.ca.nortel.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DU5CH-0005d1-VS; Fri, 06 May 2005 11:57:04 -0400
Received: from zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com (zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com [47.140.202.35]) by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id j46Ff8A08664; Fri, 6 May 2005 11:41:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <JJ80W13C>; Fri, 6 May 2005 11:41:32 -0400
Message-ID: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9D0469A4F0@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com>
From: Hamid Ould-Brahim <hbrahim@nortel.com>
To: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
Subject: RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 11:41:16 -0400
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 10ba05e7e8a9aa6adb025f426bef3a30
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, l1vpn@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l1vpn@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks <l1vpn.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn>, <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/l1vpn>
List-Post: <mailto:l1vpn@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn>, <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: l1vpn-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: l1vpn-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Dimitri, My suggestion was more on the logistic side. More likely requirement, framework, solutions/mechanism will evolve (in terms of work) in parallel, if later on and as we progress an update is required on the list of requirements that will impact only the mechanisms (like specific parameters) one needs not to go and update the framework document. One can track the service requirements separately from tracking the framework. I was actually talking about service requirements (not specifically functional requirements). And since we already have a set of requirements why not start with that. Framework and service requirements can progress first... As I indicated before if providers think having a separate service requirement draft is not required and it is okay to continue the req work within the framework draft then I am fine with that. An example we can use is what has been done in l2vpn wg. Hamid. the framework document has been used to determine the protocol work this group is going to address, if two documents (requirements + framework) are to be progressed in parallel it means that either - you suggest we keep continuing work on functional requirements but then one could question whether we agree on what to do in this working group ? (note: protocol details will be worked out as part of the protocol work anyway) - or you do suggest that we close the requirements asap (but then what is the purpose of it as we would be all in agreement ? here also details will be worked out as part ofthe protocol work anyway) and the framework becomes the document where terms, working assumptions and other models get documented as suggested in the initial charter proposal would you clarify your thought because i have some difficulties to understand the logic behind the below reasoning ? "Hamid Ould-Brahim" <hbrahim@nortel.com> Sent by: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org 05/06/2005 09:39 AST To: Tomonori TAKEDA <takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com> cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, l1vpn@ietf.org bcc: Subject: RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Tomonori, > > I think framework document can describe service requirements. > > Curret framework document (draft-takeda-l1vpn-framework-03) already > contains service requirements. There may be some detailed > points to be > discussed, especially for the enhanced mode (sig+rtg model), > as we see some > discussion. (Framework document is describing a broad range > of things, but > not at the level of protocol requirements.) So, it may be > necessary to > narrow down the scope for the enhanced mode, which can be > done through the > mailing list, or if needed, through writing a separate draft. > (I don't > think we have an immediate need to write a separate draft.) > I do agree the framework draft covers the requirements and is inline with ITU L1VPN work. An option that can be considered is to separate the requirements from the framework in separate internet draft and let the two drafts progress independently (from work point of view). I assume at certain point solutions (and not the framework) would have to be compared to the set of requirements listed. Hamid. _______________________________________________ L1vpn mailing list L1vpn@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn
- [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Adrian Farrel
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Adrian Farrel
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Loa Andersson
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Tomonori TAKEDA
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Loa Andersson
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Hamid Ould-Brahim
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Adrian Farrel
- RE: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin
- Re: [L1vpn] Proposed charter for L1VPN WG Alex Zinin