[mpls] Closed - Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-ryoo-mpls-tp-aps-updates as an mpls working group document

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Working Group,

This working group adoption poll is closed.

We have a new wg document! Can the authors please post
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-aps-updates-00
with no other changes than file name, version and dates.

/Loa
mpls wg co-chair

On 2016-03-05 16:39, Loa Andersson wrote:
> Working Group,
>
> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-ryoo-mpls-tp-aps-
> updates as an MPLS working group document.
>
> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> group mailing list ([e-mail]). Please give a technical
> motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
> the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
>
> There are no IPR disclosures against this document.
>
> All the authors has stated on the on the mpls wg mailing list that they
> are not aware of any IPRs that relate to this document.
>
> Note: One of the issues that surfaced in the MPLS-RT review was that the
> implementation status was unclear. To check on this we did an early
> implementation poll. There have been responses to the mailing, to the
> mpls wg chairs and to my uni-directionally. The conclusion is that
> RFC 7271 (the specification that this document updates) is well
> implemented and we know of deployments; a rather large number of
> vendors says that they will implement this draft and operators has
> stated that it will be deployed once it is available.
>
> The working group adoption poll ends March 19, 2016.
>
> /Loa
>
> MPLS wg co-chair.