The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Feb> msg00141



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt

  • From: Scott W Brim <sbrim@cisco.com>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:25:16 -0500
  • Cc: "Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS" <dbrungard@att.com>, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, mpls@UU.NET
  • Mail-Followup-To: Scott W Brim <sbrim@cisco.com>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se>,"Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS" <dbrungard@att.com>,"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>,Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org,mpls@UU.NET
  • User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

Loa,

On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 05:58:40PM +0100, Loa Andersson allegedly wrote:
> It needs to be understood that the internal IETF process is specified
> for IDs, and in some way we need bridge that gap. IETF and its working
> groups modifies IDs, and I don't think it is good idea to start
> modifying liasions from other SDOs.

But

> Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS wrote:
> >One comment on all of this from an ITU/T1X1 history, it is difficult
> >to say apriori how a liaison will be processed. We do not have such a
> >process either. Several ways exist to respond:
> >1. simple thank you for the information
> >2. here's the answer/clarification based on current work
> >3. for a quick answer, at the meeting, have a breakout group to
> >   address a proposal
> >4. for new work, send a response saying we invite contributions to
> >   our future meetings to progress
> >  - if no contributions, not anything is done (yes we have done this
> >    too)
> >  - at the next meeting, send several proposals to the other group
> >    for their review

There is no incompatibility.  Among a rich set of possible responses,
bullet 4 covers what you were looking for above.