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

Huub van Helvoort <> Mon, 07 March 2016 09:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355AA1B3821; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 01:26:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xgm4V4lIgZkk; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 01:26:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38A9D1B3D26; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 01:26:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id l68so62578748wml.1; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 01:26:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aNVD80qV1Nt0O26HjT7WZ2pq89kX83+ebsT0B60OItc=; b=jkjeOqPwe/5mPkKq5bmaXrMxBaWGT9CRe4tXn4izSCUcpZbW2B/j+UstOoFm6EVHZS pl+lKS2s4MaHvb91xsJR0+5qQzV8x4FoC8JYRg1yw1o8ySwP0JSFQOqN30Et1yvnYJZg FxczacBAlGCCgs4UFnGIZYHSiklJ1ODxP4kCLBr090E0C5X8eSVnWna3rLR5Kgh/yW+5 WOhwD0TAXTtUbpSYg5nPKp67BW8riExccfwqaowppFcb94Lqemp1AdJApemfN0skm2dM oACXjq5UwgiMAALC1wKqlPwwO5awaci2bVbv27moWqTqZJjXY5xVtezYW5wmH42hwXp7 mHaQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from :reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aNVD80qV1Nt0O26HjT7WZ2pq89kX83+ebsT0B60OItc=; b=f8ZltTNNT/8P82/ymNaRaIOmOGBSWfbFitVR/BR8HVpQSDhHgumVgUKgCdePFEM+0z djHaIXCBo6JNaRHp56RWfS0XlGFQ6DWqDRjI4QQ4ff6w1SLBPrRIb/rh520uonZsw9Wn dk0L7LFwZzD9sojC+LCSjS5iXfk9FNSKLdWjDk1Mb2HJevW4EwqG5AurM1UcAwxOBRqA z8DtqTWAiJr3Eqzo32HTVTNH4mIhdShFlL4XkjpDf47hOoKlgkbBu46JYLDSJPF+ZmLw FwIGAWdDJ/Jv9X1YOTZqvBohBznHuQQ5aybic5HV9jL1lmMsi1fVg3oV5CK8vD/aMZvP xCig==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIJVtNzeyxBUAo6xcERbKgYdh0UQoXLrlPciE1hNQkhJFoKOwH/lZNiM0nvsWcjyg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id b188mr12570152wma.77.1457342797765; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 01:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from McAsterix.local ([]) by with ESMTPSA id 192sm12781937wmw.0.2016. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Mar 2016 01:26:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 10:26:47 +0100
From: Huub van Helvoort <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Loa Andersson <>, "" <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-ryoo-mpls-tp-aps-updates as an mpls working group document
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 09:26:41 -0000


Yes, I support adoption of this draft to become WG draft.

Cheers, Huub.


On 05-03-16 09:39, 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 ( 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.