Re: [mpls] poll on the Rosetta Stone draft

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Mon, 01 June 2009 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974643A7134; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 06:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 udvPk0IQhsXd; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 06:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42C53A6B04; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 06:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.36.158.96] (wdhcp-158-96.verkstad.net [192.36.158.96]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F1752D404F; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:06:16 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4A23D245.4070609@pi.nu>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:06:13 +0200
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: stbryant@cisco.com
References: <4A1BB784.7030501@pi.nu> <4A23D092.8010005@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A23D092.8010005@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, pwe3@ietf.org, mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] poll on the Rosetta Stone draft
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 13:06:19 -0000

Stewart,

you are right on both accounts, I'd also like to see a cleaner
draft, but think that the the draft is mature enough.

In my mind the Rosetta Stone draft will be the last of the
first set (first set = very poorly defined) of MPLS-TP drafts that
we progress to RFCs, we need a terminology that is stable.

/Loa


Stewart Bryant wrote:
> 
>> this is to start a two week poll on the suggestion to make the
>> draft-helvoort-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-00 an MPLS working group
>> document.
>>
> Normally we would require a draft to be in a cleaner
> state before accepting it as a WG draft. None-the-less
> I support this being a WG draft.
> 
> One question - I assume that it will not be published
> as an RFC for a while so that we can continue to
> add new terms to it as the project progresses.
> 
> Stewart

-- 


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@pi.nu