RE: Advancing the Protocol and Morin Drafts

[Thomas Morin <[e-mail]>]

Hi Luyuan,

Luyuan Fang :
>
> When there is substantial deployment in the field with the existing
> approach, making a newer proposal a must and the exiting one an optional
> is business/operation/customer impacting. 

The statement above doesn't match the reality of the documents being
discussed: draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast does *NOT* include the
existing draft-rosen deployments ; *whatever* option is chosen inside
draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast -- including the one closest to
draft-rosen -- any draft-rosen deployment will have to go through a
migration phase to become in line with the current IET specs.

> Many folks spoke out here are running live networks, this is not a 
> theoretical debate. 

Believe me, the many operators co-authoring
draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations are not taking this issue by the
theoretical side...

-Thomas



> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf
> 
> > Of Marshall Eubanks
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 10:04 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Cc: Ross Callon
> > Subject: Advancing the Protocol and Morin Drafts
> > 
> > This email starts a 3 week call for input, to expire October 23, 2008,
> 
> > for the following steps:
> > 
> > 1.) To accept draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-03 as a working 
> > group document;  and
> > 
> > 2.) To turn this document into a requirements draft, with mandatory to
> 
> > implement features for an interoperable implementation. The authors 
> > have indicated that they are willing to do this.
> > 
> > Our intention is, if this approach is accepted, to then begin WG last 
> > call to submit to the IESG for publication:
> > 
> > draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast
> > draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp
> > 
> > We expect that these two documents will be submitted more or less as 
> > is (i.e., certainly with any new bug fixes or other necessary 
> > corrections and improvements, but without specific mandatory to 
> > implement feature description in those drafts).
> > 
> > Please respond to the list with your recommendations for these two 
> > courses of action.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Marshall & Danny
> 
>