Re: [mpls] One week poll on Loss / Delay drafts

Yes. I Support

-Binny J

On 16 December 2010 02:23, George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com> wrote:

>  Folks -
>
> We have had a number of requests to extend draft-ietf-mpls-tp-loss-delay to
> cover more general MPLS applications.  In discussions among the authors and
> co-chairs, we believe that it would be less confusing to all involved to
> split the document into two.
> One called draft-ietf-mpls-loss-delay which covers all of the mechanisms
> and one called draft-ietf-mpls-tp-loss-delay-profile.
>
> Dan Frost has been kind enough to submit both of these proposed workgroup
> documents as
> draft-frpst-mpls-loss-delay and draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-delay-profile.
>
> This begins a one week poll to accept both of these drafts as workgroup
> drafts.
>
> A yes vote is to adopt these two drafts and terminate work on
> draft-ietf-mpls-tp-loss-delay.
>
> A no vote would result in the additional MPLS related content being added
> to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-loss-delay.
>
> The poll ends December 22 at 24:00 UTC.
>
> George and Loa
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>