The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Mar> msg00121



[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, 6 Mar 2003 10:37:53 -0500
  • Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, mpls@UU.NET
  • Mail-Followup-To: 'Scott W Brim' <sbrim@cisco.com>,Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org,mpls@UU.NET
  • User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 11:54:34AM -0800, Shahram Davari allegedly wrote:
> >> > It might be a good idea to require that all IETF protocols support
> >> > vendor-specific extensions, so that they could be used by 
> >other SDOs
> >> > and for experiments.
> >> 
> >> Ouch... draft-iesg-vendor-extensions-00.txt
> >
> >But that doesn't solve the problem.  There are some protocol
> >requirements that can't be met just by extra semantics.
> >
> 
> Could you please give an example. 

Obviously, something that involves extensions to the protocol machinery.