[mpls] Re: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Tony Li <[e-mail]>]

Hi Xiao Min,

Did you see Jim’s proposed text?  I’m fine with that.

T


> On Sep 10, 2024, at 7:01 PM, - xiao.min2 at zte.com.cn <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Tony,
> 
> 
> 
> Have we reached a compromise on the modified text?
> 
> Is the text proposed by Stewart acceptable to you or not?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Xiao Min
> 
> Original
> From: TonyLi <[e-mail]>
> To: Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>;
> Cc: James Guichard <[e-mail]>;肖敏10093570;draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;mpls <[e-mail]>;mpls-chairs <[e-mail]>;The IESG <[e-mail]>;
> Date: 2024年09月11日 01:18
> Subject: Re: [mpls] John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> 
> Hi Stewart,
> 
>> I don’t think we should make definite statements prior to the fact, and I remain of the view that if people want to continue to use the approach described here we should permit them to do so and not pull the rug from under their feet.
> 
> Marking something historic does not prevent anyone from using it.  In this particular case, the implementors and users of this draft already are well aware of what’s been agreed to and support the decision, so there is no surprise whatsoever.  I suspect that they will use their current deployments indefinitely and may never migrate to MNA. And that’s just fine.
> 
> T
> 
> 
> 
> 
>