The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Feb> msg00189



[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: George Newsome <gnewsome@ieee.org>
  • Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 14:31:17 -0500
  • CC: Stephen Trowbridge <sjtrowbridge@lucent.com>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se>, mpls@UU.NET
  • User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1

Curtis Villamizar wrote:

> 
> Steve,
> 
> Loa's draft documents IETF process that has pretty much been put into
> place under the guidance of the IESG to keep the level of junk down to
> a minimum and insure that extensions both address real needs and their
> deployment is feasible.  The sooner participants in outside SDOs
> recognize this, the better for them.

>

So in the spirit of reducing the amount of junk to IESG, it seems that 
the IETF already understand their process, so this ID can be dropped.


> Earlier you stated, that if an outside SDO specified an extension and
> you expect the IETF to simply accept that.  It may turn out that the
> IETF has documented their process in rfc2026 and clarified it here and
> you simply have to accept that.  :-)
> 


The IETF doesn't collaborate with other SDO's, so there is no need for 
any further discussion on mechanisms for collaboration, and one less ID 
is needed.

George