Re: [Pce] Request WG Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures

[Quintin Zhao <[e-mail]>]

Julien, 

The authors of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures have
discussed (thanks to co-authors for comments!) the strategy for the work and
our plan is as follows: 

1. Review the requirements. Our operator co-authors are very useful for
having these discussions, but we would like feedback from the WG as well;

2. Create a single hybrid solution. We feel we can create a good solution
that utilizes the strengths of BRPC and Core Tree technologies; 

3. Continue to compare requirements against selected solution and modify as
necessary;

5. Implement and complete!

Our purpose is to converge on a single solution. We do not think multiple
inter-domain P2MP solutions are wanted or necessary. We agree that we have a
lot of time ahead of us in developing our solution. We have already received
comments from the WG and we would like more feedback. 
 
Thank you!
Quintin

-----Original Message-----
From: Quintin Zhao [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 3:22 PM
To: '[e-mail]'
Cc: '[e-mail]'; '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Request WG Adoption of
draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures

Hi Julien,	

Yes, we still believe that we have a lot of work ahead them regarding this
work item. We hope that adoption of this work item by the WG would make the
work more visible and generate further interest in developing the overall
solution. 

I believe we have a broad consensus across the co-authors for how to move
this work forward. Please give me a few days to confirm our plan with my
co-authors and then I will mail you and the WG our intended strategy. 

Regards,
Quintin

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:57 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Request WG Adoption of
draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures

Hi Quintin.

It is a significant step that authors of both drafts agreed on working
on a single document and we congratulate all of you for that.

During IETF 76, you also mentioned "Lots of work and analysis ahead" and
a need to "continue to review requirements and select the technique that
best meets the requirements". Indeed, the current version of the
document looks more like a solution list than an actual merge of former
proposals. Considering the complexity induced by an inter-domain P2MP
extension, we would appreciate before taking any decision that you
elaborate on the way you intend to move forward towards a common
solution.

Thanks

Julien

________________________________

From: Quintin Zhao [mailto:[e-mail]] 

Hi Co-Chairs and PCE WG,

Different parties have been working on solutions for computing P2MP
paths across multi-domain networks. At IETF 75 we were requested by JP,
to formulate a plan and resolve any issues in order to move the work
forward. After calls and emails between draft-ali-pce-brpc-p2mp-ext and
draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedure authors, we felt there
was concurrence to merge the solutions and work together on a unified
solution. At IETF 76 we presented our initial/combined PCE-based
Shortest Constrained P2MP Inter-domain TE-LSP solution
(draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-02). 

We would like to know if the co-chairs and WG would be in favor of the
document becoming a WG draft?

Regards,

Quintin


*********************************
This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and
intended solely for the addressees. 
Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.
Messages are susceptible to alteration. 
France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed
or falsified.
If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it
immediately and inform the sender.
********************************