Re: TSVWG Status Sept 2011

Francois Le Faucheur <flefauch@cisco.com> Wed, 07 September 2011 08:41 UTC

Return-Path: <flefauch@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C260421F866A for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 01:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.187
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.411, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 0IbjAjNrkgmF for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 01:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5BB21F8610 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 01:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; l=2816; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1315385016; x=1316594616; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=Gd715ezsFzkgkJqBo+nYlJiIeu3/gP7o4tXGT4OIa5c=; b=Q0PlQccmBVQ1PvVBiv6RFKHD5o4/bSdK8CchNVL7osVBMVeh5s6OKkLa VL37oNQfi1UazRdMdF3JhxSq1GEDz7KuQJLWvodDktRlSpnMa8P+A7+2K 21KrHAzDRD78joiNmQHQT48yVDdngK/jPOqhyfSqMUwZzBow+IJw6Kxx3 k=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.68,344,1312156800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="53548238"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Sep 2011 08:43:22 +0000
Received: from ams-flefauch-8714.cisco.com (ams-flefauch-8714.cisco.com [10.55.161.197]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p878hMW4009319; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 08:43:22 GMT
Subject: Re: TSVWG Status Sept 2011
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-604--77080278"
From: Francois Le Faucheur <flefauch@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E671F4E.5000200@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:44:12 +0200
Message-Id: <BF647AC9-2AA9-4BF3-A539-B9C7D89F664E@cisco.com>
References: <4E671F4E.5000200@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: "James Polk M." <jmpolk@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, tsvwg WG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 08:41:48 -0000

Hi James,

On 7 Sep 2011, at 09:37, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> 
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec
>      WG interest in this topic recorded at IETF-78.
>     Charter update would be needed to progress this work.
>     5 Reviews needed to determine energy/technical direction.
>     Version -05 (presented in Beijing, IETF-79)
>     Version -06 (presented in Prague, IETF-80)
>     RSVP directorate was consulted.
>        2 reviews from RSVP-DIR received (Bruce Davie, ?).
>        2 additional reviews promised (Ken Carlberg, Francois LeF).

You have been looking into a potential restructuring of the encoding based on Lou's suggestion. If you're going to do this, I'd rather do the review on the updated document. If not, I can review the current version. I'm not arguing you should, or should not do that change, but can you let us know if/when you see that happening, so I plan the review accordingly?

Thanks

Francois