Re: WG adoption call for VPLS PE Model for E-Tree Support

[Giles Heron <[e-mail]>]

Further to this email,

only one person requested adoption of an alternative VPLS-based E-Tree solution, so we won't be progressing any other VPLS-based solutions.

however we do intend to progress an E-VPN solution also.  As discussed in the IETF 84 meeting we only intend to standardise one E-VPN approach.

please respond to the WG if you have any concerns with our planned approach.

Nabil & Giles

On 10 Sep 2012, at 14:12, Giles Heron <[e-mail]> wrote:

> There seems to be strong consensus to adopt this draft as a WG doc.
> 
> Would the authors please re-issue the draft as:
> 
> draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-00.
> 
> thanks!
> 
> Nabil & Giles.
> 
> On 23 Aug 2012, at 17:03, Giles Heron <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> This is a request to gauge consensus as to whether:
>> 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jiang-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-06
>> 
>> should be accepted as an L2VPN WG draft.
>> 
>> We discussed adoption of this draft in Vancouver, and the consensus of the room seemed to be to adopt it, but of course the list is where we make decisions :)
>> 
>> Note that we also discussed adoption of the other VPLS E-Tree drafts in Vancouver and there was very little support.    If multiple people email me asking to adopt one or other of those drafts I'll poll that one also.
>> 
>> Please review the draft and respond to the list by Thursday September 6th with comments as to its suitability for WG adoption.
>> 
>> Giles
>