IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal

"Naidu, Venkata" <Venkata.Naidu@MARCONI.COM> Tue, 29 October 2002 00:04 UTC

Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA04590 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:04:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <14.007979E1@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:05 -0500
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 351844 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:05 -0500
Received: from 169.144.68.6 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:05 -0400
Received: from mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.12]) by mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA17760 for <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com (whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.221]) by mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA13331 for <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: by whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <4W8KGYK4>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Message-ID: <39469E08BD83D411A3D900204840EC5576341E@vie-msgusr-01.dc.fore.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:07:02 -0500
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: "Naidu, Venkata" <Venkata.Naidu@MARCONI.COM>
Subject: Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list

Rohit,

-> => 3. "OSPF TE" and "OSPF Hitless Restart" MIBs must be
-> =>    considered as separate drafts. Recent OSPFv2 MIB only
-> =>    talks about Opaque LSAs - but content carried in those
-> =>    LSAs are not specified in any MIB. I am be willing
-> =>    to write those drafts - what is your opinion, Kireeti/Padma ?
->
-> I was considering reflecting OSPF-TE in a MIB too. And this could
-> be a potential item for this or a future. But is there an operator
-> burning for this stuff?

  Yes :-) there are definite requests I encounter for OSPF-TE MIB.
  If not Hitless Restart MIB, we do need OSPF-TE mib. As you know,
  it is potential candidate for deployment in MPLS (apart from VPNs).

-> =>
-> => 4. "Flooding over Parallel Point-to-Point Links" can be
-> =>    considered as an informational RFC.
->
-> What draft are you referring to?

  draft-ietf-ospf-ppp-flood-01.txt

--
Venkata.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email