Re: [PWE3] OAM Msg Mapping Drafts

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Fri, 25 July 2008 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <pwe3-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pwe3-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-pwe3-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9926F3A69A1; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:52:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D1853A694F for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, 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 VhZAGC+ZXT-O for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:52:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AEB83A69A1 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:52:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E0051DE05; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:52:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28175-06; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:51:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.120] (static-72-71-250-36.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [72.71.250.36]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A0251DDEB; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:51:56 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <BA477F0B-10E8-4EDC-BA72-69397803D724@lucidvision.com>
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
To: stbryant@cisco.com
In-Reply-To: <4889E042.2090404@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:51:41 -0400
References: <4889E042.2090404@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at lucidvision.com
Cc: pwe3 <pwe3@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] OAM Msg Mapping Drafts
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/pwe3>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: pwe3-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pwe3-bounces@ietf.org

	I would go for option C, but press for a LC within 30 days or go with
one of the other options if that deadline cannot be met.

	--Tom


> We had hoped to resolve this face to face before
> the PWE3 meeting next week but that now looks
> unlikely. We are  concerned that we need to
> resolve this without the issue absorbing all
> of the time in the WG meeting.
>
> In order to gauge the consensus of the WG we would
> would like to ask some questions.
>
> When considering how to approach the message mapping
> document issue, we think that the most important
> considerations are:
>
> 1) That we deliver a high quality document that describes
>   the design to the implementors and users.
>
> 2) That the Ethernet design is fully reviewed.
>
> 3) That there is consistency between the approaches used
>   for the various OAM mappings.
>
> 4) That the Ethernet design is delivered in an expedited
>   manner and the ATM and FR designs are also delivered
>   in a timely manner.
>
>
> We have three approaches:
>
> a) LC and publish draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-06.txt, and
>
>   Accept draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk as
>   a WG document
>
> b) LC and publish draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-07.txt
>   (i.e. Luca's rewrite) but without  the Ethernet
>   section, and
>
>   Accept draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk as a WG
>   document
>
> c) Use publish draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-07.txt  as
>   the basis for ongoing work.
>
> Before any document is sent to the IESG for publication
> we will ensure contributions are appropriately acknowledged
> through  editorship, authorship, & acknowledgments. So
> please set any such issues aside and focus on the best
> document to deliver to our users.
>
> Please also set aside the poor etiquette that has taken
> place, and  focus on  how best to deliver  the required
> documentation to the community. On the basis of
> considerations 1..4 above, which documentation
> approach, a, b or c, do you consider most likely to
> achieve the goals of the WG?
>
>
> Stewart & Matthew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> pwe3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3