The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] [IP-Optical] RE: Optical link bundling. Was Re: Draft Minutes From Pittsburgh
Alex, We're planning on sending a new I-D to IETF in a couple of weeks. I'll send you a separate Email with the current MS Word version. Anyone else who wants a copy before the IETF version could send me a private Email (dont bother the mailing lists!) John John Strand AT&T Lightwave Networks Research Dept. 100 Schulz Drive, Room 4-212 Red Bank, N.J. 07701-7033 (732)345-3255 jls@research.att.com -----Original Message----- From: Alex Zinin [mailto:azinin@cisco.com] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 7:26 PM To: John Strand Cc: 'Yong Xue'; darren.freeland@bt.com; braja@tellium.com; jdrake@calient.net; neil.2.harrison@bt.com; mpls@UU.NET; ip-optical@lists.bell-labs.com; 'oif_carrier_group' Subject: Re: [IP-Optical] RE: Optical link bundling. Was Re: Draft Minutes From Pittsburgh John, Friday, October 20, 2000, 3:33 PM, John Strand <jls@research.att.com> wrote: [...] > (3) As Yong mentioned, a number of carriers feel that the complexity of the peer model make > this a high-risk initial architecture. I think that Darren and many other people with > transport network experience (including me) would feel a lot more comfortable with > peer model proponents if more attention and respect were being given up-front to defining > requirements and understanding what makes optical networking different. For more on this, > see the I-D draft-chiu-strand-unique-OLCP. (Btw, there's a significantly revised version of > this available to anyone interested that reflects excellent comments from John Eaves and others.) Can I suggest that you just publish the new version? Thanks, Alex.
|
|