IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: retry: interest in composite links

"Mcdysan, David E" <dave.mcdysan@verizon.com> Wed, 10 November 2010 06:16 UTC

Return-Path: <dave.mcdysan@verizon.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5F83A68C6 for <rtgwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 22:16:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.397, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 ADh2V0hrShw4 for <rtgwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 22:16:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sacmail2.verizon.com (sacmail2.verizon.com [192.76.84.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CEA23A68C5 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 22:16:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from irvintrmemf3.verizon.com (irvintrmemf3.verizon.com [138.83.34.103]) by sacmail2.verizon.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id oAA6GMqX007460; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:16:22 -0500 (EST)
X-AuditID: 8a532267-b7b45ae000003f9b-79-4cda38b53e61
Received: from smtptpa4.verizon.com ( [138.83.71.177]) by irvintrmemf3.verizon.com (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 71.C9.16283.5B83ADC4; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 00:16:22 -0600 (CST)
Received: from FHDP1LUMXC7HB04.us.one.verizon.com (fhdp1lumxc7hb04.verizon.com [166.68.59.191]) by smtptpa4.verizon.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id oAA6GKUm024350; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:16:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from fhdp1lumxc7v11.us.one.verizon.com ([fe80::4c3d:3366:54ab:8118]) by FHDP1LUMXC7HB04.us.one.verizon.com ([2002:a644:3bbf::a644:3bbf]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:16:21 -0500
From: "Mcdysan, David E" <dave.mcdysan@verizon.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:16:20 -0500
Subject: RE: retry: interest in composite links
Thread-Topic: retry: interest in composite links
Thread-Index: AcuAl2afQICzT9DSQ42Zkquk0ONsSAABYMku
Message-ID: <2464076D83FAED4D985BF2622111AAC40F95CCF872@FHDP1LUMXC7V11.us.one.verizon.com>
References: <AANLkTi=R6uxb=8=SVcbZTkg7HqHhwOSQMP4ktLfMg_cO@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=R6uxb=8=SVcbZTkg7HqHhwOSQMP4ktLfMg_cO@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:16:02 -0000

As a co-author, my response may be biased, but here it is. :)

Thanks,

Dave

________________________________________
From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas [akatlas@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:23 AM
To: rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: retry: interest in composite links

I would like to better understand the interest and enthusiasm for the
composite links work.

Do you:
    a) Agree/disagree that the problem exists and is interesting?
YES
    b) Look to it to solve existing known issues in your networks (or
those of your customers)?
YES
    c) Plan to actively contribute by doing timely reviewing and
commenting on drafts?
YES
    d) Intend to submit related solutions architecture drafts to meet
the requirements?
YES. Composite link framework.
Some solution drafts are already emerging, ones which cite this requirements draft are:
- http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-wang-ccamp-latency-te-metric-01.txt
- 

Other drafts are emerging that may meet some of the requirements, and I suggest that people interested in this topic take a look at them and comment:
- http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhang-ccamp-srlg-fa-configuration-01.txt
- http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-05.txt
- http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label-01.txt
- http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kompella-mpls-rsvp-ecmp-00.txt

    e) I'm just watching - do you have more popcorn?

What timeframe do you want to see this work move along in?
   i) Yesterday would have been good...
YES.
  ii) Can we reach consensus on an implementable solution in the next year?
I hope so.
 iii) It'll take years - and that's ok.
Unfortunately, that is increasingly becoming the IETF way. :(
 iv) It's supposed to complete sometime?


There has been very little discussion on the mailing list.  More is
the best way of helping progress
to occur between meetings.

Thanks,
Alia

P.S.  Sorry for the missend.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email