The MPLS WG Archive

[Loa Andersson <loa.andersson@utfors.se>]

David,

the main argument not to make historic has been that there are
organizations  outside the IETF that reference the cr-ldp spec.
Re-classifying it would cause problems for those organizations.
By telling them that it is our intention not to further progress
the cr-ldp, we given them time to revisit this issue and take the
actions they need.

/Loa

David Meyer wrote:

>>>  - There is a clear majority for discontinuing work on CR-LDP.
>>>    However, there is no IETF process to "de-standardize" an existing
>>>    proposed standard that would apply in this situation. Thus
>>>    CR-LDP will remain a proposed standard.
>>>
> 
> Send it to historic, a la RFC 3166/3167, or someone will make me
> implement it.
> 
> 
>>>To this end:
>>>
>>>  - Existing WG drafts related to or updating/changing CR-LDP will
>>>    be progressed according to normal procedures.
>>>
>>>  - the Working Group will take on no new WG documents related to
>>>    CR-LDP.
>>>
>>>  - A message will be sent to the relevant standards organizations
>>>    notifying them of this change of focus on MPLS signaling protocols.
>>>
> 
> Again, can we send it to historic or is there some procedural
> (or other reason) not to do this?
> 
> Dave
> 
> 


-- 
     Loa Andersson
     Chief Architect,
     Utfors Research, Architecture and Future Lab (URAX)
     Utfors AB
     Råsundavägen 12
     Box 525, 169 29 Solna
     Office          +46 8 5270 2000
     Office direct   +46 8 5270 5038
     Mobile          +46 70 848 5038
     Email           loa.andersson@utfors.se
     WWW             www.utfors.se