Re: [LOOPS] Results of the LOOPS side meeting May 2020

Agreed.

On 6/4/20 12:44 PM, Marie-Jose Montpetit wrote:
> FEC negotiation is a good idea.
>
> Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
> marie@mjmontpetit.com <mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com>
>
>
>
> On June 4, 2020 at 4:50:37 AM, Liyizhou (liyizhou@huawei.com 
> <mailto:liyizhou@huawei.com>) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> From last discussion, I think LOOPS would provide the flexibility to 
>> allow the negotiation of what FEC to be used.
>>
>> So in the charter proposal,
>> "at least one FEC scheme will be included in order to exercise the 
>> protocol mechanisms. "
>>
>> We can add text like,
>> Channel to allow FEC scheme negotiation is also to be defined?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Yizhou
>> "
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: LOOPS [mailto:loops-bounces@ietf.org 
>> <mailto:loops-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
>> Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 8:16 AM
>> To: loops@ietf.org <mailto:loops@ietf.org>
>> Subject: [LOOPS] Results of the LOOPS side meeting May 2020
>>
>> Thank you all for participating in the May 26 side meeting.
>> I have updated the charter proposal with the results of the discussion:
>>
>> https://github.com/loops-wg/charter
>>
>> This reflects embracing ECN both for the end-to-end flows and for the 
>> path segment, as well as cleaning up the milestones to a single 
>> deliverable (which might or might not be multiple documents; I don’t 
>> think the charter needs to nail this down). Goals for FEC support are 
>> scaled down, but FEC stays in as part of the first deliverable.
>>
>> I have also moved the “discussion” section to a separate file.
>>
>> Please have a timely look as the charter will be one of the inputs to 
>> the BOF process — we need to have a solid BOF proposal by June 12.
>>
>> Grüße, Carsten
>>
>> -- 
>> LOOPS mailing list
>> LOOPS@ietf.org <mailto:LOOPS@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops
>> -- 
>> LOOPS mailing list
>> LOOPS@ietf.org <mailto:LOOPS@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops
>