Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart early review of draft-zia-route-02

["RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Gorry,

I would certainly be happy to hear that the TSVWG is interested in
progressing this work.

What do you think is the best way of making a decision on that? Should the
authors have a slot on the TSVWG agenda at IETF-111? Or is this something
that can be decided on the list?

Cheers,
Adrian

Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
>
>> You are right that, as an Independent Submission, this work has not
>> received review within the IETF. Of course, all input and review will
>> be welcomed, and if the IETF were to decide that this work falls into
>> the scope of an IETF working group, we would be happy for it to be
>> taken up and developed there as an IETF document. However, our
>> understanding is that there is currently no enthusiasm for that, so
>> we proceed on the Independent Stream.
>
> Related WG: I think maintaining the RMT and FECFRAME specs is a core
> transport area topic, and this could fall within the work of TSVWG.
> This WG recently completed work on new FEC Schemes. This doesn't imply
> whether there is interest, or not, in standardising such new methods
> for RMT. The proposed spec does have associated IPR, and that might
> influence the interest to develop an IETF spec, or might not.

-- 
Adrian Farrel (ISE),
[e-mail]