Re: [trill] Should we adopt draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05.txt as a WG document?

Hi,

I read the draft and the problem statement is clearly laid out.
This is surely an interesting problem and could be many ways to solve it.
Directory assistance is one of the solutions.

As the document doesn't specify the solution part of it, I would prefer to have this document converted to as framework and requirements document. A solutions document could be worked out separately.

If the decision is to convert as FW doc, authors may want to re-spin a new version prior to adoption, clearly laying out the framework to  solve the problem. Otherwise, I personally feel it wouldn't be much value add to have an informational document just describing the problem without solution details.

Cheers
Sam

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org> wrote:

> 
> <http://http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05>
> 
> We've discussed earlier versions of this document in the WG in the past, and it seems like useful information for a technique that helps with ARP and ND scaling. It does not include any protocol changes or extensions.
> 
> The document is intended as an informational document (it says "Intended status: Standard Track" but that is incorrect) explaining how directories can fit into TRILL.
> 
> Note that there is claimed IPR associated with the draft:
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1788/>
> 
> Please send comments to the TRILL list before June 27.
> 
> Thanks,
>   Erik
> _______________________________________________
> trill mailing list
> trill@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill