[mpls] R: Fwd: Response to Updated draft Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 043.02]

"erminio.ottone_69@libero.it" <erminio.ottone_69@libero.it> Sat, 15 January 2011 12:59 UTC

Message-ID: <13335901.3667141295096531759.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 14:02:11 +0100
From: "erminio.ottone_69@libero.it" <erminio.ottone_69@libero.it>
To: stbryant@cisco.com, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [mpls] R: Fwd: Response to Updated draft Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 043.02]
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "erminio.ottone_69@libero.it" <erminio.ottone_69@libero.it>

The new LS text does not address my concern.

The LS is now stating that although the IETF is not commited to deliver to ITU-
T what it was promised in the JWT agreement, the IETF will keep saying the 
opposite.

>----Messaggio originale----
>Da: stbryant@cisco.com
>Data: 15-gen-2011 9.50
>A: "mpls@ietf.org"<mpls@ietf.org>
>Ogg: [mpls] Fwd: Response to Updated draft Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 
043.02]
>
>I would like to thank the MPLS Working Group for the review of this 
>liaison.
>
>I have sent the following to the ITU-T which I believe to be factually 
>correct.
>
>Regards
>
>Stewart
>(IETF Liaison to ITU-T on MPLS)
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: 	[mpls] Response to Updated draft Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 
>043.02]
>Date: 	Sat, 15 Jan 2011 08:49:16 +0000
>From: 	Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
>Reply-To: 	stbryant@cisco.com
>To: 	tsbsg15@itu.int, "ITU-T SG15 TSB"@cisco.com, Greg 
><Greg.Jones@itu.int>, Hiroshi Ota <Hiroshi.OTA@itu.int>, IAB <iab@ietf.org>
>CC: 	mpls@ietf.org <mpls@ietf.org>, Greg <Greg.Jones@itu.int>, 
>Malcolm.BETTS <Malcolm.BETTS@zte.com.cn>, statements@ietf.org, 
>yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp, ITU-T SG15 TSB@cisco.com, Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam) 
><kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com>, Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>, Adrian 
>Farrel <Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com>, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>, 
>Huub Van Helvoort <hhelvoort@huawei.com>, Ghani Abbas 
><ghani.abbas@ericsson.com>
>
>
>
>Title: Response to Updated draft Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 043.02]
>
>Submission Date: 15th January 2011
>
>From: IETF Liaison to ITU-T on MPLS stbryant@cisco.com
>To: tsbsg15@itu.int
>     greg.jones@itu.int
>     hiroshi.ota@itu.int
>     iab@ietf.org
>CC: swallow@cisco.com
>     loa@pi.nu
>     paf@cisco.com
>     stbryant@cisco.com
>     adrian.farrel@huawei.com
>     mpls@ietf.org
>     yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp
>     steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com
>     ghani.abbas@ericsson.com
>     hhelvoort@huawei.com
>     malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn
>     kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com
>     statements@ietf.org
>
>Response Contact: stbryant@cisco.com
>Technical Contact: stbryant@cisco.com
>
>Purpose: For Action
>Deadline: 15th March 2011
>
>Thank you for your liaison statement "LS233 - Updated draft
>Recommendation G.tpoam [Ref 043.01]"
>
>The MPLS Working Group notes that this document contains
>text describing MPLS-TP OAM protocols not designed and
>standardized using the IETF Standards process. Specifically it
>uses material from draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y1731-06. Please may we
>draw your attention to the status section of all Internet-Drafts
>which says:
>
>"Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
>months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
>documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
>as reference material or to cite them other than as
>"work in progress".
>
>Please also note that since the draft filename starts with
>the prefix string "draft-bhh" this clearly identifies it to
>the reader as a document expressing the personal technical
>views of the authors and hence hence as a document that that
>does not have any acknowledged level of IETF consensus.
>
>Since the text of draft Recommendation for G.tpoam is based
>on an MPLS-TP OAM protocol not designed within the IETF
>Standards Process this is a breach of the SG15 agreement
>with the IETF as published in "Report of the first meeting
>of Working Party 3/15 Transport network structures
>(2009-2012)" (Geneva, 1 – 12 December 2008) which can
>be found at http://www.itu.int/md/T09-SG15-R-0004/en. As a
>consequence the MPLS WG has not been asked to review this
>Draft Recommendation by the IETF management. When the ITU-T
>SG15 liaises a draft Recommendation written in accordance
>with the above agreement, IETF management will ask the MPLS
>WG to perform an in depth review. We look forward to receiving
>your next draft.
>
>Please confirm that the ITU-T intends to continue with the
>joint work on MPLS-TP and that the ITU-T will align this
>recommendation with the IETF MPLS-TP OAM design before advancing
>this document through the ITU-T publication process.
>
>You should also be aware of the IETF copyright rules. Please
>see http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/archive/IETF-
>Trust-License-Policy-20091228.htm for further details.
>
>Since this draft Recommendation contains text in which
>the ITU-T SG15 has proposed making changes to IETF protocols
>without the approval of the IETF, the MPLS Working Group
>have referred this liaison to the IAB for their
>consideration.
>
>Please can we take this opportunity state that the IETF
>is committed to developing the MPLS-TP solution as described
>in the Joint Working Team Recommendations and meeting
>the jointly agreed MPLS-TP requirements documented in
>RFC5654.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>mpls mailing list
>mpls@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>mpls mailing list
>mpls@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>

[mpls] R: Fwd: Response to Updated draft Recommen… erminio.ottone_69@libero.it