Re: [PWE3] VCCV2

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Wed, 01 August 2012 18:21 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F7E11E826D for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GWyR1Rq35bCL for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE36511E8179 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A60220AA80; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:21:37 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at www.lucidvision.com
Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (static-72-71-250-34.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7F+ThjnMheBO; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:21:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [130.129.65.103] (dhcp-4167.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.65.103]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED71220AA74; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:21:35 -0400 (EDT)
References: <07F7D7DED63154409F13298786A2ADC90452C68D@EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il> <FE60A4E52763E84B935532D7D9294FF13924D6D8C8@EUSAACMS0715.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <FE60A4E52763E84B935532D7D9294FF13924D6D8C8@EUSAACMS0715.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-040C01F6-743C-46DF-A16F-A960A718E7B5"
Message-Id: <1F8715B6-A7B9-46DF-9C09-1A0FEBC2F399@lucidvision.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206)
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 11:21:31 -0700
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
Cc: Yaakov Stein <yaakov_s@rad.com>, "pwe3 (pwe3@ietf.org)" <pwe3@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] VCCV2
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:21:38 -0000

that is two (related) Issues. I think we were first asking about doc structure

tom



On Aug 1, 2012, at 11:17 AM, Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Dear Yaakov, Tom, et al.,
> I'd support RFC 5085bis rather than formal obsolecence of PW VCCV Control Channel Type 2 and introduction of new Type 4.
>  
>     Regards,
>         Greg
> From: pwe3-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yaakov Stein
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 10:24 AM
> To: pwe3 (pwe3@ietf.org)
> Subject: [PWE3] VCCV2
> 
> Hi all
>  
> I would like to bring to the list the questions Tom and I raised yesterday.
>  
> 1)      Should we do a short (and quick turnaround) draft just on the CC types (obsoleting type 2 and introducing type 4) ?
> 2)      If so, should we merge VCCV2 with VCCV-2 ?
>  
> The alternative is a long draft that documents all of VCCV.
>  
> Y(J)S
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> pwe3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3