The MPLS WG Archive

[Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>]

> Based upon the GMPLS implementation survey, I came to the 
> conclusion that a
> number of vendors thought it was to their advantage or 
> benefit to implement
> RSVP-TE.


That advantage or benefit could have been related to the existing RSVP-TE
market share.

-Shahram 

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gray, Eric [mailto:egray@celoxnetworks.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:43 AM
> To: John Drake; 'Zhi-Wei Lin'; Don Fedyk
> Cc: Loa Andersson; MPLS wg
> Subject: RE: initiating a discussion on mpls singaling protocols
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> 	This also is not a fair characterization.  :-)
> 
> 	The survey indicates current implementations.  It
> is not possible to infer from such a survey exactly what 
> the surveyed vendor's interests are.  Speaking as one
> person who has worked with several vendors now in this
> area, it seems much more a question of priorities rather
> than interests and these priorities are driven by many
> factors other than interest.
> 
> Eric W. Gray
> Systems Architect
> Celox Networks, Inc.
> egray@celoxnetworks.com
> 508 305 7214
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Drake [mailto:jdrake@calient.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 11:30 AM
> To: 'Zhi-Wei Lin'; Don Fedyk
> Cc: Loa Andersson; MPLS wg
> Subject: RE: initiating a discussion on mpls singaling protocols
> 
> I thought that the original comment about Windows was rather 
> odd, since I
> didn't think it was up for standardization.
> 
> Also, I don't think that any one is proposing to use marketshare as a
> metric.  There was some discussion of the GMPLS 
> implementation survey, which
> seemed to indicate that not too many people were interested 
> in building
> products that had CR-LDP capabilities.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhi-Wei Lin [mailto:zwlin@lucent.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:18 AM
> To: Don Fedyk
> Cc: Loa Andersson; MPLS wg
> Subject: Re: initiating a discussion on mpls singaling protocols
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I believe that making a decision on whether RSVP-TE or CR-LDP 
> should be on
> standards track based upon marketshare should NOT be how a standards
> organization works...  As another person commented, if we're 
> making our
> decision based on marketshare then Microsoft Windows would be 
> the standard
> for OS, and probably also need to switch to using Word as the 
> default format
> for documents...
> 
> Zhi
> 
> 
> Don Fedyk wrote:
> 
> > Hi Loa
> >
> > I am against the proposal on the belief it is too soon to take this 
> > step. If we had applied this policy to the original classical RSVP 
> > protocol it would have been information some 5 years ago.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don 
> >
>