Re: [Mpls-interop] FW: Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Sun, 19 April 2009 09:32 UTC
Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278903A6A94 for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 02:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.283
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.283 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tz0hLzldbnP4 for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 02:32:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns.elverljung.se (ns.elverljung.se [194.68.48.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDD73A684E for <mpls-interop@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 02:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.100] (h133n2fls33o883.telia.com [217.208.62.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa) by ns.elverljung.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D177F2D8645; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:34:05 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <49EAF007.3050108@pi.nu>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:33:59 +0200
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF05002346@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF05002346@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: MEAD team <mpls-interop@ietf.org>, "Mcdysan, David E" <dave.mcdysan@verizon.com>
Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] FW: Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft
X-BeenThere: mpls-interop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF MPLS Interoperability Design Team <mpls-interop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop>, <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-interop>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls-interop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop>, <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:32:54 -0000
Eric, Soctt and Kam, First, thanks for a real good job on this draft I really appreciate your effort to keep things on schedule. Second. if I understand correctly this version is aligned with the version (-06) that the IETF sent to the ITU-T for a one week final approval check. Since this request did not result in a quick response but resulted in a prolonged debate it has now taken ITU-T more than two weeks to respond. There are two consequences - the schedule is sliding and< - we don't know what impact on other documents it might have if the ITU-T decides come back to us and ask for further changes. I'll therefore *not* start the wg last call until I have the response on the MPLS-TP requirements draft. I will also rework and publish a new MPLS-TP schedule. /Loa Eric Gray wrote: > Loa/George, > > A revised version of the MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft has recently > been posted and is > available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-nm-req-01. > > This version is the result of a very small set of mostly editorial > changes as a result of the > very small number of comments received prior to accepting this document > as a WG draft. > As you can see below, we feel that it is ready to be subjected to an > initial last call. > > Would you be so kind as to initiate a WG last call on this draft? > > Thanks in advance... > > -- > Eric > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam) [mailto:hklam@alcatel-lucent.com] > *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 1:21 PM > *To:* Scott Mansfield; Eric Gray > *Subject:* RE: Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft > *Importance:* High > > Agree. > > > > --Kam > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Scott Mansfield [mailto:scott.mansfield@ericsson.com] > *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 1:06 PM > *To:* Eric Gray; Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam) > *Subject:* RE: Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft > > > > I'm all for that. That would line up with Loa's wishes as well. > > > > regards, > > -scott. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Eric Gray > *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 1:07 PM > *To:* 'Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)'; Scott Mansfield > *Subject:* Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirements draft > > Kam/Scott, > > > > Do we think we are in a position to ask for an initial last call on the > requirements draft at this point? > > > > We have to soon, and I suspect we will get very few comments between now > and then if we do not... > > > > -- > > Eric > -- Loa Andersson Sr Strategy and Standards Manager phone: +46 10 717 52 13 Ericsson /// +46 767 72 92 13 email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com loa.andersson@redback.com loa@pi.nu
- Re: [Mpls-interop] FW: Latest MPLS-TP NM Requirem… Loa Andersson