IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal

"Naidu, Venkata" <Venkata.Naidu@MARCONI.COM> Mon, 28 October 2002 23:19 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 SAA03516 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:19:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <2.00797A90@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:05 -0500
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 351691 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:05 -0500
Received: from 169.144.68.6 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:04 -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 SAA15746 for <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:01 -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 SAA08746 for <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: by whq-msgrtr-01.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <4W8KGXBJ>; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Message-ID: <39469E08BD83D411A3D900204840EC5576341D@vie-msgusr-01.dc.fore.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:22:02 -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/Acee,

 Some quick comments w.r.t new charter.

 1. Can you consider "Flooding Optimizations" into charter ?
    If not, can you please explain the reason, why we should not ?
    This is field of its own - we might expect lot of drafts.

 2. One of the Alex's work "OSPF Link-local Signaling" will
    be very imp for future OSPF enhancements. As you know,
    the options are getting over in OSPF headers.

 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 ?

 4. "Flooding over Parallel Point-to-Point Links" can be
    considered as an informational RFC.

 Thank You.

--
Venkata.

-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: Rohit Dube [mailto:rohit@XEBEO.COM]
-> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 5:55 PM
-> To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
-> Subject: OSPF WG Charter Proposal
->
->
->
-> Folks,
->
-> Here is a strawman of the Charter. Please have a look at and send
-> any comments you may have to me or Acee or to the list.
->
-> The current charter is largely designed to clear up items that have
-> pending for a while. The charter will be re-visited periodically and
-> new items that come up will be added after discussions with the ADs.
->
-> Thanks,
-> Rohit and Acee
-> (OSPF WG Co-chairs)
->
->
->

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email